Why do some signature campaigns not count posts in Politics & Society?

[MarryWithBTC]

I have noticed that some signature campaigns do not accept posts made in the Politics & Society board. I have been wondering about the reason behind this policy.
I currently have two possible explanations in mind but I will like to hear from campaign managers and experienced forum members if these assumptions are correct or if there are other reasons behind it.

1. Is it because the board is considered a spam zone?
2. or is it because campaigns prefer to remain politically neutral and do not want their brand to appear associated with political opinions of their participants?

I mean, do projects try to avoid indirect political endorsement through users wearing their signatures?

[bitbollo]

Mainly services would be advertise in a "Practical way". That's the reason gambling websites required a certain amount of messages in gambling and so on.
Plus I am not expecting visitors frequent more a certain topic then a technical one...
Personally I have seen rarely posts in politics&society due the "low content" provided - pretty far away from the btc most of the time. btc should be neutral by default.

[Mia Chloe]

~snip

Although there are a lot of way people can claim to justify why, ultimately it's just based off the manager's choice. If a manager believes a particular board doesn't suit their target audience they will most definitely not make it count in that signature campaign and vice versa.

Similarly some campaigns have it that their participants must post in gambling boards and some don't make it compulsory some allow local board posts and some don't so there are many conditions.

[hd49728]

I have noticed that some signature campaigns do not accept posts made in the Politics & Society board.

1. Is it because the board is considered a spam zone?

It is a spam zone.

2. or is it because campaigns prefer to remain politically neutral and do not want their brand to appear associated with political opinions of their participants?

It's also because companies have their products like exchanges, gambling so they will need to hire posters in boards that can expose their signatures and companies to other forum members who possibly have same interests in Bitcoin exchange, trading, or online gambling.

There are other spam boards too but if companies see posts in those boards are helpful for their marketing, they will count posts published in those boards. Generally, it's company and manager business, so you just read and agree with terms in a signature campaign before joining.
Spam sections.

[JeromeTash]

I have noticed that some signature campaigns do not accept posts made in the Politics & Society board.

1. Is it because the board is considered a spam zone?

It is a spam zone.

I don't think this is currently true. I am a regular poster in the Politics & Society board, and I can say the board is organised, especially with the help of Xal0lex. Back then the board had a mod who went missing for some good time, and Theymos took a while to appoint a mod for that board. You would basically have off-topic and repetitive posts there. I even posted about this (is Politics and Society board turning into a lowkey Off-topic board?), which is not the case anymore.

I think it just comes to the preference of the campaign manager. Just like there are campaign managers who do not want posts in the lending board, altcoin boards or gambling boards. Let's not overthink this. 

[MarryWithBTC]

There are other spam boards too but if companies see posts in those boards are helpful for their marketing, they will count posts published in those boards. Generally, it's company and manager business, so you just read and agree with terms in a signature campaign before joining.
Spam sections.

I just went through the link you shared and discovered that Bitcoin discussion board was also listed as a spam board. How true is this? What does spam board actually mean? Is it a board where low effort topics are created? If yes, I can agree that I have seen some low effort topics created, yet there are still high quality discussions there.

From the responses above, I should actually discard my reason 2, it seems that there are no such things as political reasons.

[noorman0]

It depends on the manager, I think they pay attention long enough to certain boards that they think get a bigger audience and are relevant. However, you will get substantive answers only from individual managers.

By the way, some also exclude beginner & help boards which I think actually attract more guests

[Lucius]

~snip~
I mean, do projects try to avoid indirect political endorsement through users wearing their signatures?

Politics is a very slippery slope and I believe most managers don't want to encourage their campaign participants to post on the P&S board, but many of us do post there even if the posts don't count. As far as I know, only one campaign required political neutrality for its participants, but it ended.

My personal opinion is that people should be allowed to behave naturally and not encouraged to participate in topics where they cannot contribute to the discussion in a proper way. A campaign that focuses most of its posts in only one part of the forum does not have nearly as good visibility as those campaigns that give more freedom to their users.

[tabas]

Some managers and campaigns pay for that section. But no one stops from posting there if you have some topics you're very interested with. It doesn't matter if it's paid or not, as long as you like the topic and you can be part of the discussion. As for the managers, they are giving what the companies that hired them the very need for their metrics and exposure and that's why if they think that the P&S isn't the best place for their gambling/exchange service, then they are excluding it because it's not rational to what they are advertising.

[coin-investor]

2. or is it because campaigns prefer to remain politically neutral and do not want their brand to appear associated with political opinions of their participants?

I mean, do projects try to avoid indirect political endorsement through users wearing their signatures?

I consider these two to be the likely reasons: politics is dirty, and some participants may use this section to attack persons whom they hate in politics, and the product they endorse doesn't want to have anything to do with who they support, you are free to post if one of your topics of interest is politics, but it will not be counted.
The managers will choose sections where they can generate more leads.

[PrivacyG]

I personally believe it is all about which Boards managers think may help promote the service more and get more visibility for it.  I do not always agree with their choice as some times I consider at least one of the Boards they disconsider to be actually helpful for the service promotion but it is what it is and I am guessing they do know best.

-----

I consider these two to be the likely reasons: politics is dirty, and some participants may use this section to attack persons whom they hate in politics,

This happens on most of the other Boards too however.  It is not a strictly a 'Politics & Society Board' behavior.  Even I some times express political views in the other Boards and 'attack' who I hate in politics.  In my case, pretty much everyone!

-----

My personal opinion is that people should be allowed to behave naturally and not encouraged to participate in topics where they cannot contribute to the discussion in a proper way. A campaign that focuses most of its posts in only one part of the forum does not have nearly as good visibility as those campaigns that give more freedom to their users.

Speaking from personal experience with this kind of situation, I agree.  I am more than convinced that it is a very clear difference between the quality of my posts when I have the freedom to express my self and to write where I want versus when I have to post in a particular part of the Forum in order to qualify for earnings.

At some point it becomes too much anyway and posting feels forced.  And then what is the point.  Bitcoin Talk should be a fun place to spend time around.

[Upgrade00]

For me, it's because it's somewhat off topic. The attraction of the forum is it being heavily crypto focused, so crypto related services want to advertise to that audience.
Almost all of the other boards are directly or indirectly related to crypto and financial systems, hence they attract the right audience. Politics and society while it may have some topics related to economics is very niche and unrelated to crypto as a whole, so mostly not the right audience for those brands to advertise too. The members that frequent there along with other boards will get to see the ads regardless.

In the same way if you compartmentalize the off topic board into different child boards like, ethical dilemma, music, movie recommendations, they will also not be seen by most as ideal boards to advertise crypto related services.

[Obim34]

1. Is it because the board is considered a spam zone?
2. or is it because campaigns prefer to remain politically neutral and do not want their brand to appear associated with political opinions of their participants?

I mean, do projects try to avoid indirect political endorsement through users wearing their signatures?

Gambling casinos focuses on specific board, Crypto Exchanges running signature campaign as well have their focuses on specific boards, according to the market a campaign is advertising, some boards are less important, same reason they have maximum quota on local sections.

Signature campaigns don't tell you not to post in those boards (politic boards and other section), be free to post but it won't be counted towards weekly quota, some rules are meant to exist in order to make the promotion more effective.

[Hyphen(-)]

1. Is it because the board is considered a spam zone?
2. or is it because campaigns prefer to remain politically neutral and do not want their brand to appear associated with political opinions of their participants?

I mean, do projects try to avoid indirect political endorsement through users wearing their signatures?

Your first reason is correct because that’s how some campaign managers feel, they feel like all discussions going on in that board is not related to Bitcoin, so they assume spammers are there to spam the board meanwhile some important discussions might be going on there.

But I think the main reason is because of the type of platform been advertised by the manager.
If it is a casino platform which contain almost 80% of the campaigns in this forum now, I think the managers prefer posts from gambling boards and other relevant boards in the forum, they do exempt boards where signature is not displayed and politics and society board.

Even other platforms that are not casino and gambling also the managers don’t always recommend posting in the politics and society board, so the rule or every manager matters.

[Merit.s]

I think, it's the campaign manager choice to choose which board he wants the campaign participants to post on based on their own different reasons, because I see that Hhampuz allows posting in more boards than the other campaign managers.

I feel very comfortable posting on boards of my choice than forcing myself to post on boards, I have little knowledge on. However, it's their campaign and you must follow the rules because you applied for it.

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

I have noticed that some signature campaigns do not accept posts made in the Politics & Society board. I have been wondering about the reason behind this policy.
I currently have two possible explanations in mind but I will like to hear from campaign managers and experienced forum members if these assumptions are correct or if there are other reasons behind it.

1. Is it because the board is considered a spam zone?
2. or is it because campaigns prefer to remain politically neutral and do not want their brand to appear associated with political opinions of their participants?

I mean, do projects try to avoid indirect political endorsement through users wearing their signatures?

I think it depends on the campaign manager, and his personal view about which board he/she intend to focus while promoting his clients signature campaign. Because when it comes to the general scale, that assumption is totally not correct, because I have been a frequent poster on the Politics and Society board and my post are always counted for signature campaign payment of the week.

However, you will notice that most of the signature campaigns we have on this forum are all crypto casinos companies, and sometimes this casinos have a specific board which they target most, especially "Beginners & Help" where newbies always come to share their opinions about Bitcoin, "Bitcoin Discussion" board where people talk about issues relating to Bitcoin and finally, "Gambling" board where people discuss about sport activities and games. So each company is free to choose which board to focus more on while trying to target their potential clients.