Well, not really. Whatever the reason for your leaving the campaign, that was maybe a convenient excuse, but not the truth. You
applied to a new one just a few minutes later, and we all know inactive accounts don't participate in campaigns.
The application was edited to "removed" not long after it was posted, which is when I made the decision.
But to make your claims sound even more ridiculous, you even created your own
topic offering your signature space and "promising" at least 100 posts per month. How would you be able to do that if you were planning on "taking a break from the forum"?
This was posted on February 26, when I still intended to be active in the forum, weeks before I decided officially to take a break. Also, that thread did not promise at least 100 posts per month. All it did was state my average amount of posts since in the last year.
I quit my signature campaign because I was taking a break from the forum. Not the other way around.
Well, not really. Whatever the reason for your leaving the campaign, that was maybe a convenient excuse, but not the truth. You
applied to a new one just a few minutes later, and we all know inactive accounts don't participate in campaigns. But to make your claims sound even more ridiculous, you even created your own
topic offering your signature space and "promising" at least 100 posts per month. How would you be able to do that if you were planning on "taking a break from the forum"?
With the offer he made to promote signatures it seems clear he did not intend to take a break, only he can explain the discrepancy in his statement but if we are being honest it will not have been the first time he has sent out conflicting messages. I could never fully work out why he would have a particular anti-agenda against the number of members and companies he chose to post about. Furthermore, the hypocrisy about what he would not promote and why, followed by the completely opposite course of action.
Are we surprised?
I've explained my way of thinking multiple times when it comes to signature campaigns. You both choose not to understand it, and default to the label of hypocrisy. I refuse to indulge in this comment further as I know that you are only making this post to get the same response as you have when you have made it in the past.
I didn't chime in on the other thread because I've witnessed what is being discussed in this thread first-hand and did some digging months before this thread arose. In essence, I was saying "Hey, I've seen this going on as well". I'm not sure how that is a problem?
Because you're not doing that, you're throwing a lot of baseless accusations around and slighting individuals and entire companies without really having the first clue what you're talking about. That's the main problem. Nobody is going to interfere with your right to do that here, but you don't get to remain free of judgment or criticism; that is also our right to point out when what you're saying is wrong, contradictory, or simply doesn't make sense.
They're not baseless though...Just have ninjastic.space open on one monitor and the sportsbet thread open in another, and look at the flow of merits between the most active participants over the last 20+ pages. You will see that very low quality posts are frequently merited there, and that is only one sign of the abuse that is surrounding the sportsbet.io brand and fan-base. If you look for a while like I have, and extend your searches into trust pages, you'll end up with a network of members who have helped each other to rank up at an expedited rate in comparison to a member who actually contributes value to the forum.
Though if you aren't interested in doing that and you want to conclude my opinions are baseless (ironically, with no proof of them being baseless), sure.
