Super High IQ BenCodie vs Low IQ forum posters about gambling.

[Shishir99]

I could not care less about anyone's opinion about me wearing a signature and being paid for it

As long as what I an advertising is not a scam, then I do not care.

If better services were offering campaigns, I'd go to them. But the fact is there are not.

If you really think the gambling board is as ethical as other boards this forum contains, you're out of touch with basic ethics.

Lol, guy that is willing to promote something that he thinks is highly unethical and exploitative for a little bit of bitcoin will teach us about ethics.  

I'm not promoting shit, they're leasing my sig space. I take zero responsibility for the service nor do I endorse it for as long as it's not a proven scam.

Good job picking one thing out of all of the valid parts of what I said and using it to invalidate my post. Great job, actually. Very effective. Dumbass.

...

If you have strong opinions, you should also have strong principles to suport it. You are not principled, if you were, you would never have agreed to apply and agree wear the signature and avatar to promote a casino here. Because of your unprincipled nature, you have no right to talk about ethics.

Also not all discussions in the gambling board is about casinos, some discussions under its subboard "gambling discussion" address and talk about issues relating to gambling.

I also think merits should not be focused on posts in this section. It does not positively contribute to the Bitcoin economy.

Gambling involves use of bitcoins, and there are gamblers who have a preference for gambling with bitcoins. Believe it or not, the fact that bitcoins can also be useful for gambling can be a reason why some people have gotten bitcoins.

Discussion about gambling is not worthy of needing a merit source. My post stands.

My principles align with how the forum is conducted. If the principles of the forum were better, I would be better.
I know that I'm not a scammer, a gambler, a scumbag, or anyone who contributes negatively to this community. So, anyone's judgement means absolutely 0 to me. I know my code, and I know that it's reasoned, refined and fine.

Well, I was coming here to say that I also support cryptofrka's application, as I understand that he is a person who spends a lot of time in the gambling section and can help distribute merit to quality posts that often get buried between rubbish pages.

But I'm also surprised that BenCodie is going as a moral defender here, I don't want to get too long with this because is kind of OT, but if you say this:

As for the question if gambling is unethical - it undoubtedly is.

What you need to do is to stop wearing a gambling ad on your signature, especially because you get paid for it. I don't know where you learned ethics, but where I'm from someone who lets himself be bought to advertise something he thinks is wrong is not only behaving in a morally wrong way, he is also a hypocrite.

All of you go back to the gambling board where you all came from and belong. If you can't read and understand a high IQ post, don't respond to it with bs personal attacks about my signature.

I'm not a hypocrite for taking opportunity when it's available. And just because I wear a signature, thsn doesn't mean that should be a main focus to my valid opinion on a topic.

All of you have a common theme - low IQ.

I do not want to write these off-topic things in someone's merit source application thread. My first question to you was why do you think gambling board is unethical? If you think so, why are you promoting gambling through your signature space? What I believe is it depends from person to person and perspective. If you consider gambling as an unethical thing, Bitcoin is unethical as well from that perspective. Gambling is considered a sin in some religions. Having a girlfriend or an open relationship with any other girl is considered a sin as well. It's unethical to have a relationship with a girl without marrying her. It varies from culture to culture. You can have a girlfriend and have sex with her without even marrying her and it's not a problem in Western countries. If you do the same thing in Arab, the punishment is death in front of a thousand people. From that perspective, Bitcoin is unethical as well.

If you want to talk against gambling, you still need a gambling board to discuss why it's bad and why people should not gamble. You cannot discuss gambling-related things on other boards. While you consider it as an unethical thing, you are promoting a casino through your signature space. People pointed it and you started attacking them while you claimed they attacked you. If you believe you are the only person with a super high IQ, then I have nothing to say about it. But it's an irony to promote something that you consider an unethical thing. Your campaign requires you to write five posts a week on a gambling board while you claim it as unethical and you asking them to move where they came from (Gambling board).

If you cannot take healthy criticism, why are you on the internet forum?

Let's have a healthy discussion about it. But, if you start using foul language and start throwing mud, I will lock the thread.

[1714803012]

1714803012

[1714803012]

1714803012

[AbuBhakar]

This topic should be move on reputation since it’s all about forum member behavior towards the gambling discussion and this is not a gambling discussion thread.

His point of view against gambling while promoting one on his signature is responsibility of his campaign manager for accepting him to promote the brand. Heated argument is normal on discussion. Just ignore him if you don't like his post.

[Shishir99]

This topic should be move on reputation since it’s all about forum member behavior towards the gambling discussion and this is not a gambling discussion thread.

His point of view against gambling while promoting one on his signature is responsibility of his campaign manager for accepting him to promote the brand. Heated argument is normal on discussion. Just ignore him if you don't like his post.

For some reason, I believe this thread should belong in the gambling board since the main question in the OP is why do you think the Gambling board is unethical. You can consider the title as clickbait and I used it because almost nobody has the same point of view as him. I already explained why it should depend on a person's point of view.

The campaign manager has nothing to do with it. The campaign manager will look for the posts he writes and he will get paid only if he writes five posts in gambling boards. If he does not, he is unlikely to get paid.

[AbuBhakar]

The campaign manager has nothing to do with it. The campaign manager will look for the posts he writes and he will get paid only if he writes five posts in gambling boards. If he does not, he is unlikely to get paid.

But will you choose someone to promote your brand that calls it highly unethical? Do you think the owner will be happy that he is paying for someone that doesn’t like the brand? I believe the manager doesn’t know this fact when he accepted the user since he is really contributing on other aspect of the forum aside from gambling.

For some reason, I believe this thread should belong in the gambling board since the main question in the OP is why do you think the Gambling board is unethical. You can consider the title as clickbait and I used it because almost nobody has the same point of view as him. I already explained why it should depend on a person's point of view.

This topic will surely revolved around the user that you include in the title since the quoted post you provide is a heated argument regarding the user perspective on gambling against the ironic signature campaign that he is promoting.


Being OT here, Gambling is a legit business with licensed to operate. I don't see the point on how it's being unethical while it's probably fair to players. Gamblers have a fair chance to win and lose here. It's our choice on how do we spend our money for entertainment.

[SamReomo]

Everyone has their own point of view where someone may consider something as good while others many consider it bad. There's nothing wrong with gambling if someone is willingly doing it because it's someone's personal choice to spend their money on gambling activities and no one else can interfere with their personal matters. Gambling is a choice and if someone is spending his/her money to gambling activity then he/she has the complete right to do that. I don't know about that guy but I believe that the casinos we promote through our signature space are the ones who trust and we believe that they can be helpful for other users as well.

I know that promoting their signature can also give us some rewards in the form of Bitcoin, but I don't think that promoting a service solely to earn Bitcoin is the real reason of promoting it. Most of the casinos that we promote have been doing really great from the day the have launched their services and if we contribute to their success then there's nothing unethical in that approach. I also won't favor the casinos that are known for their shady ways and no other member of the forum would rent his/her signature space to those shady casinos. If we take the example of 1xBit then you can see that there are hardly any good members of the forum who promoted that casino after realizing that the casino was doing shady business.

[Alphie12]

This topic should be move on reputation since it’s all about forum member behavior towards the gambling discussion and this is not a gambling discussion thread.

His point of view against gambling while promoting one on his signature is responsibility of his campaign manager for accepting him to promote the brand. Heated argument is normal on discussion. Just ignore him if you don't like his post.

How do signature campaigns work? Do people have to promote the casino with posts?

[Don Pedro Dinero]

How do signature campaigns work? Do people have to promote the casino with posts?

Yes, the signatures we wear. As you can see, I wear vbet signature.

There is a campaign thread where it specifies the requirements to be able to apply and if you are accepted, the requirements to be able to receive payment depending on the number of posts. You can see the campaign I am currently in for example:

[CFNP] vbetFTN.com | Leading Online Gambling Operator Signature Campaign | Sr. +

As for BenCodie, I already said it in the other thread. He is simply a hypocrite. He goes around giving moral lessons about how bad gambling is while promoting a gambling house on his signature and gets paid for it.

It's the most serious case of hypocrisy I can remember in the time I've been on the forum. And neither his ranting nor his bonobo IQ is going to hide the truth.

[Plaguedeath]

I'm pretty sure you're getting offended by him and this thread is somewhat like a sarcasm.

So what's the thing we need to discuss here? are we talking about gambling is bad or good, or we're talking about BenCodie?

If most of forum posters are low IQ, I think most of the posts should have been deleted since this forum has a rule about zero, low value, and pointless post. If the posts from these low IQ forum posters weren't deleted, it means they're not low IQ.

1. No zero or low value, pointless or uninteresting posts or threads. [1][e]

[AbuBhakar]

This topic should be move on reputation since it’s all about forum member behavior towards the gambling discussion and this is not a gambling discussion thread.

His point of view against gambling while promoting one on his signature is responsibility of his campaign manager for accepting him to promote the brand. Heated argument is normal on discussion. Just ignore him if you don't like his post.

How do signature campaigns work? Do people have to promote the casino with posts?

By wearing the signature code on signature space located on the bottom part of our post. We are being paid per post since the banner is display on our post. Doing negative post about the brand you are promoting right below your post is like disrespecting the company that paying you. You shouldn’t advertise a service that is against your principle since there’s a lot of user that applying for his spot which the company will not receive criticism while paying.

It’s technically promoting the company through post since we are like a moving billboard in the forum. We don’t need to directly promote the casino on our post but it will be helpful since the longevity of the campaign depends on the result of the promotion which both party will benefit in the end.

[lovesmayfamilis]

By wearing the signature code on signature space located on the bottom part of our post. We are being paid per post since the banner is display on our post. Doing negative post about the brand you are promoting right below your post is like disrespecting the company that paying you. You shouldn’t advertise a service that is against your principle since there’s a lot of user that applying for his spot which the company will not receive criticism while paying.

Omar Khayyam has a verse: "Everything is bought and sold, and life frankly laughs at us: We are indignant, we are indignant, but we are sold and bought." It's all about the price. If someone cannot be bought at one price, they will be bought at another. People primarily live for themselves and their own benefit. Of course, each of us always has the choice of participating in and promoting a particular company. But the main fact is the price. I think there are a lot of people on the forum who are forced to write posts on topics that they cannot justify in real life. And BenCodie isn't the only one. Another thing is important: how we, knowing this, begin to dissemble and pretend, proving a different point of view.
Again, why is it here on the forum, on the Internet, to show your weaknesses by reacting negatively to posts that do not coincide with your opinion?

Thick skin is relevant for all occasions and at any time of the year.

[BenCodie]

My only comment

I called one or two members low IQ because of the logic they used. I do not think that the whole forum has low IQ nor do I think that my IQ is superior to the majority of the forum

This is what happens when you speak out ladies and gentlemen.

I also do not care at all about this thread and I will continue to share my opinion freely, as I have a right to.

If we're going to skew and misconstrue words or make threads about people when they have a controversial opinion, then we're up for a lot of threads just like this one if people exercise their freedom of speech and right to an opinion.

Grow up OP.

[Cantsay]

I think I have seen this kind of behavior in an user who claimed that mixers signatures should be banned from the forum after one of the mixers here in the forum did an exit scam yet the user had a mixer in his signature space.

We have different services here in the forum that are running a signature campaign and if you feel that casinos are a shitty business and gambling is unethical and not something you’ll ever indulge in why still wear them in your signature space? And the funny part is that he claimed not to be promoting, if you’re not promoting them what then is the campaign manager paying you for?

Sometimes we just tell ourselves things just to get rid of a guilty conscience and in this case that’s exactly what’s is happening, as long as you’ve a casino in your signature space you’re part of the casino and also indirectly involved in whatever happens to those that use the site. OT, but take 1xbit.com signature participants for example if they are not involved or promoting the site and just have them in their signature space as you have said then explain why they were tagged?

~~~
The campaign manager has nothing to do with it. The campaign manager will look for the posts he writes and he will get paid only if he writes five posts in gambling boards. If he does not, he is unlikely to get paid.

If an user does not know anything about a service that they are promoting it is the duty of the campaign manager to remove them from the campaign and if possible add them to a more appropriate campaign if available. If you check some campaign threads you’ll see the capacity manager advising participants to get familiar with the service that they are promoting and not just delve blindly into promoting them.

[holydarkness]

My only comment

I called one or two members low IQ because of the logic they used. I do not think that the whole forum has high IQ nor do I think that my IQ is superior to the majority of the forum

Erm... what?

This is what happens when you speak out ladies and gentlemen.

I also do not care at all about this thread and I will continue to share my opinion freely, as I have a right to.

If we're going to skew and misconstrue words or make threads about people when they have a controversial opinion, then we're up for a lot of threads just like this one if people exercise their freedom of speech and right to an opinion.

Grow up OP.

Just to be clear of your moral principles, you're against gambling due to its capitalist nature, and you'll speak out when matters being involved is about you and your opinion [which, I have to say, kinda natural], but you'll keep things to yourself when you know a platform is a scam because it's not your responsibility to keep the forum safe, and as long as the said platform paid you good money to post, you'll do that? I think I'm confused, isn't that a branch of capitalism?

[Nwada001]

If one observes this forum very well, you will notice that there are some signatures that they will not want to wear on their signature space. This is not because they have anything against the line of business that they are in, but this could be as a result of them not wanting to protect any of them.

Although one doesn't need to say much or directly promote what is on their signature by shilling them around the forum, at least if you don't want to talk about it, it should be better to avoid cases where you will have to criticise their line of work in order to make a point.

BenCodiie could have just followed in the footsteps of others who don't like promoting what they don't support. Well, all of us have different ways of doing things, and we have individual choices as well. I just wonder what the few people who will want to visit the gambling site the member is promoting are going to think of the signature wearer if they come across such a post.

[robelneo]

I just wonder what the few people who will want to visit the gambling site the member is promoting are going to think of the signature wearer if they come across such a post.

Gambling signature participants I understand need to post a minimum number on the gambling section If you don't like gambling and you are on this, you will have to make your post genuine and convincing that you know this category, and for me, it's a struggle, you need experience, or knowledge about the subject.

But since this forum was created as an open forum, I let him have his way, Anyway, he is a good contributor on many subjects this is something we cannot take away from from Ben.

[elevates]

It's his way of expressing what he thinks good or bad. I don't think if he is part of a gambling signature campaign he has to always talk good about it. Furthermore the BM doesn't think that he is doing anything wrong for the campaign then why are we judging him. I don't think that this a big issue and should have been dragged into the reputation board. If he is not breaking any rules of campaign or the forum then I have nothing further to discuss here.

[_BlackStar]

There is certainly some controversy between his right to free speech and the signature campaign he is promoting - but I'd rather disagree that it deserves special attention on the reputation board.

Shishir99 - report to your manager about your intended user if you think he is not suitable to promote the campaign just because of his opinion. But I don't think someone should decide anything about it even if you feel offended - meaning you can ignore the user for whatever reason. It's just a advice - but get back to work.

[JollyGood]

BenCodie has made a series of unacceptable posts in the Whirlwind thread therefore he seems to have a very high opinion of himself. It is probably that narcissistic attitude that has made him become noticed recently, when he most probably would have stayed unnoticed. He seems highly opinionated on matters of gambling and mixers but is willing to push sentiments aside if it means participating in signature campaigns.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5446575.msg62744027#msg62744027
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5446575.msg62746026#msg62746026
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5446575.msg62746469#msg62746469

My only comment

Care to post here BenCodie:

BenCodie, please review your last few posts (including the ones where you have insulted respected members of the forum) and ask yourself if you have achieved anything constructive by using profanities and insults. I doubt it will help you when you put forward any argument to debate any matter in any walk of life therefore it should not help you here.

Also, would you like to re-think your post about you saying in your opinion you knew Whirlwind was a scam but you did two very interesting things. First, you did not post warnings about it (because you said you were not obliged to) and second, even though in your opinion it was a scam from the very beginning you did not hesitate to apply to join their signature campaign and you would have no problem with participating if you were selected.

That sort of conduct is shocking to say the least if you are stating you believed it was a scam but had no problem wanting to be part of their signature campaign.

[yahoo62278]

BenCodie has made a series on unacceptable posts in the Whirlwind thread therefore he seems to have a very high opinion of himself. It is probably that narcissistic attitude that has made him become noticed recently, when he most probably would have stayed unnoticed. He seems highly opinionated on matters of gambling and mixers but is willing to push sentiments aside if it means participating in signature campaigns.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5446575.msg62744027#msg62744027
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5446575.msg62746026#msg62746026
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5446575.msg62746469#msg62746469

My only comment

Care to post here BenCodie:

BenCodie, please review your last few posts (including the ones where you have insulted respected members of the forum) and ask yourself if you have achieved anything constructive by using profanities and insults. I doubt it will help you when you put forward any argument to debate any matter in any walk of life therefore it should not help you here.

Also, would you like to re-think your post about you saying in your opinion you knew Whirlwind was a scam but you did two very interesting things. First, you did not post warnings about it (because you said you were not obliged to) and second, even though in your opinion it was a scam from the very beginning you did not hesitate to apply to join their signature campaign and you would have no problem with participating if you were selected.

That sort of conduct is shocking to say the least if you are stating you believed it was a scam but had no problem wanting to be part of their signature campaign.

As I have said before, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Pushing that opinion on others is where you go wrong, otherwise he is allowed to feel a certain way, be a hypocrite, and even be a dick.

If people do not like it, there is that ignore button, if managers do not like his controversial statements, they can fire and exclude him.

[Shishir99]

My first question to this user was why he thinks that the gambling board is an unethical board which is why he does not support the merit source application. He believes there is no need for merit sources for the unethical board while he himself wearing a casino signature and promoting it. Isn't it ironic? He might have a different point of view but how is it when you say dealing drugs is unethical and you promote it through a billboard you own just because someone pays you money for that?

I noticed whoever says something against his opinion, he starts talking to them aggressively and he believes they have low IQ and this user is the only person with super High IQ. I do not see any reason for insulting reputed members just because they shared their opinion about him and yet he expects everyone to accept his opinion (whoever does not agree with his opinion = Low IQ). Isn't it Ironic?