Would you consider wearing signature = shilling?

[Laudanum]

Everything gets more complex the more you dig into it.

Shilling or being a shill is usually meant as a negative comment.
To me shilling has a sneaky element to it rather than a " pumper" or "spammer" or " advertiser"

Is a shill worse than and advertiser? Not always

So an example of a shill to me would be going to an competitors alt thread and start saying like " this is a great project it is very similar to project X except they are further ahead and their approach is bla bla bla whilst making project X look favorable. I mean good shills are much more subtle than that and very valuable resources.

Some may say that's just down right sneaky and devious and bad. However an intelligent shill that is versed in conceptual design,coding and can correctly assess the probability of success of both projects may say it would be doing those reading their posts a solid.
I mean if you were enticing investors out of a doomed over hyped shit project where they are certain to have their pants pulled down into another far more credible and valuable project with far greater chance of success. Then give me those shills all day over those that will advertise gambling or shady exchanges.

If you are overtly advertising something you know is a possible scam or scam or shady gambling site etc that makes you far more of a cunt. Sure you are not being stealthy in your approach but you are not at all considering those you are enticing in via the adverts or sigs you are spreading around everywhere.

That is just one possible possible example and one point of view.  There are many.
Shill is often thought of as far more negative term than advertiser. That's not always the case.

Obviously there are layers and layers here. It is complex but boils down to motive and sensible consideration for others.
Primary consideration for all is self first here, only tools deny this. However at what lengths and what cost to others is what separates the good from the less good through to total cunts. Shill is not a useful term generally unless you're using it as a reference for your own notes. To me sig spammers I suppose are not what I would consider shills. They are thought worse than shills in some instances.

[1715017869]

1715017869

[1715017869]

1715017869

[1715017869]

1715017869

[actmyname]

To me sig spammers I suppose are not what I would consider shills. They are thought worse than shills in some instances.

You must be of the philosophy, "turncoats and mercenaries are vermin worse than our enemy's strongest soldiers".

[Laudanum]

To me sig spammers I suppose are not what I would consider shills. They are thought worse than shills in some instances.

You must be of the philosophy, "turncoats and mercenaries are vermin worse than our enemy's strongest soldiers".

Again for me it would be complex.  Our = good?  Turn coat =  forced to take a side initially? Enemy = bad? Mercenaries = always self interest first.

Every instance is different as is perspective.

Still motive is always key.

For me anyway sig spammer is not a shill, but yes can be far worse.   Shill to me = subtle to diplomatic to sneaky to deliberately deceptive to liar. Motives ranging from good to bad.

[Vaculin]

In your case, you are not shilling roobet because this site has a good reputation IMO.

So by that logic, if Roobet did not have a good reputation, you would call him a shill?

I thought so, can't really find the exact definition of shilling since it's not in the dictionary, correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the meaning you posted.

According to Google, "Shill" means: "an accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others"

IMO, you would not shill a scam project if you are not getting anything in return, and the fact that you know you are promoting a scam project, that means you are an accomplice and you are a scammer as well. In terms of determining its reputation, I think that's one of the hardest thing to do especially if the basis is our opinion here, unless a certain project is deemed declared illegal by the regulators.

[actmyname]

According to Google, "Shill" means: "an accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others"

IMO, you would not shill a scam project if you are not getting anything in return, and the fact that you know you are promoting a scam project, that means you are an accomplice and you are a scammer as well. In terms of determining its reputation, I think that's one of the hardest thing to do especially if the basis is our opinion here, unless a certain project is deemed declared illegal by the regulators.

Don't put the cart before the horse. Reputation is gained and maintained over time - part of that could involve shilling. Any time you think in absolutes, you open up the opportunity for exploitation.

It's like believing that every time someone decides to shove in poker, they have pocket aces.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

A shill is a hustler or con-person who tries to convince other people to buy something or think something is great (shilling). The shill has ulterior motives for their actions, usually because they are the actual seller or have something to gain if the product sells well.

From the definition above and from the way I understand it, it can't be considered shilling, if only the project aren't scams but genuine businesses only promoting their service through your signature space. It should be considered shilling if the project is an obvious scams and you're still promoting it for your personal benefits. The definition stress that the shiller has something to gain.

With your signature promotion you gain monetary rewards and if your promotion reach a widen audiences and bring about patronage there's a higher chance the scam campaign will last long and keep paying you to promote their project since they're profiting from it.

Therefore when you're promoting a scam on your signature space you're also shilling that project. We can't deny the fact when advertising a project we're indirectly recommending that project to who even views it in our profile. You shill when you're trying to con people into patronizing a project for your personal benefits.

[sujonali1819]

To be honest what I take the word ''shilling'' is something (It can be done by wearing sig or without sig, That means when you blindly trust a project and advertise them even after knowing the project is not good. Again when you force someone to a project again and again. Or when a user continuously posting some good words about a project by which he is hired... etc

So in this case I will not say that you/we are shilling for which signature we are using. If so then all are here is Shiller? LOL

[actmyname]

So in this case I will not say that you/we are shilling for which signature we are using. If so then all are here is Shiller? LOL

You have to go into the metalanguage to see that in this situation, what you have done is changed the definition of shill to fit "anyone who wears a signature" thereby conveying no outside meaning to the phrase, "everyone is a shill" - that phrase would effectively translate to, "everyone who wears a signature wears a signature".

Meaningless rhetoric and linguistic bullshit. No one makes such an argument without an agenda or indoctrinated ignorance.

[Mike Pompeo]

As long as posts are constructive & not breaking any rules I just consider it a job, working. I don’t think you can class it as shilling.

Shilling is what I’d deem as unhelpful, repetitive, non constructive posting.

[Vod]

As long as posts are constructive & not breaking any rules I just consider it a job, working. I don’t think you can class it as shilling.

Jobs make people do odd things, like killing millions of Jews.  Luckily, the guards didn't see it as wrong, because their actions were constructive and they were paid. 

Morals are for the rich.