By definition, endorsements can be considered a form of advertising. Your forum signature space is your personal territory, and you're free to put whatever you like there, based on your own judgment. Whether you call it advertising or endorsement, the key factor is your personal moral perspective. Would you be okay with promoting something you'd never use yourself? If your answer is yes, it might suggest lower moral standards. If your answer is no, then whether it's an endorsement or another advertising form doesn't really change the ethical aspect.
By the way, your poll is still a bit misleading. Endorsing and encouraging are not the same thing. Even if I were to endorse a brand or service, it doesn't mean I would encourage everyone to use it.
Fixed it. Changed it to
Personal endorsement: The user supports the advertised service and the advertised service industry.
To endorse is to support, so it's accurately worded now. My apologies
If anyone wants me to reset the poll, following this change, let me know by PM or in your next post.
As for lower moral standard....I disagree with that, presumably. I think what truly represents low moral standard, is compromising your beliefs by posting how a campaign wants you to post, so that you can join the campaign. Imagine how many people are actually not pro-gambling but wearing the sig and joining the culture because it is a good opportunity? That is lower moral standard.
Having a paid ad while continuing to represent yourself and your beliefs with no compromise, that is hardly lower moral standard, at least that's how I see it.
I vote for advertisement only.
There's no obligation for the users to try or use the project that they use in their signature. You're one of the example, you wore a gambling signature, but you have a view if gambling is bad and you're not encourage people to gamble. It sounds like a hypocrite, but isn't that the campaign manager's risk? he know you're not support gambling, but he want to accept you in gambling project. He can easily not to accept you if he feel you're not the right person or a threat for the project.
Thank you. I agree.
My opinion on gambling is clear, I think it's a profit industry only. Profit by basically, any means
It is up to the campaign manager to decide if the
paid ad is still suitable. Based on my post qualify, style, etc.
Any further discussion that is not addressing the thread topic will be deleted.
Okay, so that's why it's self-moderated here?
Self-moderation is fine to prevent rule-breaking posts, to improve posting quality by deleting pyramid quotes or spelling mistakes and ask people to post it again without pyramid quotes, spelling mistakes etc. or to delete one- or two-liner shitposts or off-topic troll spam. That's where self-moderation is fine. But not to stifle valid arguments...
I have decided to leave 1mau's post here as it serves as a good example of someone who directly disrespected the rules of the topic.
Okay, so because my reply is valid and is adding the necessary context regarding your strange poll, it "disrespected the rules of the topic".
LOL
This thread is self moderated as it is for opinions on this topic only and I'd like to keep it that way. I don't want to censor people though, so I posts that are not providing an opinion or providing relevant value to the conversation will be removed and quoted in the second post.
I don't see how I'm violating your simple rules.
This thread is helping the community clear blur lines. Disrespecting that, as 1mau has, is disrespecting not just me, but the natural process that makes this community better.
My reply is helping the community to get some context regarding your strange poll and therefore not violating any rule here.
And my name is 1miau.
What is wrong with you, honestly? Why are you bringing that conversation here when it has been said already that those posts would be deleted?
Just post your opinion like everyone else and continue your opinions about me in the other thread, where they belong.
Wow, no context allowed here?
Why so, maybe some people will read up on the issue and you don't like it, that people are getting the full picture here?
The purpose of this thread is to clarify two opinions. Right now, yours is outvoted. So you can post that image all you want, it means nothing, as you're painting a picture that is, according to the current vote, invalid.
Your misleading, out-of-context poll proves exactly nothing about our discussion.
I have coins.game in my signature as they're legit (according to my due diligence). I don't have to be a gambler to be a part of that campaign, or any gambling campaign.
But according to your post, gambling is:
No one should be a merit source for one of the most unethical boards/sections of this forum. There is no shortage of merit for the amount of quality/merit worthy posts in the gambling section; which is very little in comparison to other, more important and non capitalistic boards of the forum.
I also think merits should not be focused on posts in this section. It does not positively contribute to the Bitcoin economy. It only concentrates wealth to unethical network participants who are exploring other users with unfair odds, ridiculous terms of service, extensive and intrusive kyc checks to ban accounts, questionable provably fair claims, and more.
Is your way of discrediting this thread bringing that discussion here?
Sorry for bringing some context regarding your topic.
I should delete your post, since you've completely disrespected the rules of the thread. So disappointing.
The only post violating a rule here is your post:
1. Such posts as "SELL SELL SELL", "I agree", "+1", "Support", "Watching", "Interesting", "LOL", "SCAM", "LEGIT", "FAKE", other one word posts, posts consisting mostly of swearing, quote pyramids, useless introduction threads, threads about a topic already recently discussed in several other threads.
And no valid post from me will get deleted here or I'll give you a neutral trust about your gambling "incident" right on your profile that signature campaign managers will see that right away.
I won't delete this post. But I'm not responding to it.
I fixed your complaint about "encouraging" in my last post.
Otherwise, ignoring the rest of your post. You're just causing drama at this point.
Poll
