Registered; that's the last slot for now!
I am fairly certain this is BS (LOL). The formula for activity has always been the lesser of your post count or 14 times the number of activity periods you have posted in.
Um, yes, but not always. Activity USED to be recalculated periodically and now it isn't. As pointed out by another poster:
An account whose age in days is greater than their post count gets an activity point immediately for every post made, which means some old accounts can be power-boosted to the required level by spamming the forum. This is easy to spot if you know it's there.
Thanks for forcing me to expose the exploit. Now everybody is going to try to use it on all the campaigns. It is obvious why this doesn't require reporting to the administration: it's part of the system's design. It's not the activity that is being exploited, it's the signature campaign. The change implemented a few months ago made this the case and I've had to deal with it ever since. As the forum gets older, the opportunities for this grow so all I can do as campaign manager is stay sharp.
The rules in the OP are designed to give luckybit maximum advertising exposure while giving them as many reasons as possible to not pay (aka get free advertising). I am fairly certain that there are a lot of applicants that end up not checking back to see if his "application" was approved or not and leaving up their signature.
I can think of a half-dozen reasons to not pay people that I don't enforce. As a matter of fact, I make it a general policy to be as forgiving as possible while still enforcing the stated rules and preventing abuse. I've reversed payment denials on appeal several times and the campaign is on a fixed budget regardless of results which means I have no incentive to do what you claim.
You should check the history on this thread before you make baseless accusations. A vast majority of the applicants are accepted without question and EVERY applicant is replied to in the thread with a quote; so nobody is left guessing about their application or enrollment status. I once accidentally missed an applicant during a busy period and made special arrangements to include that person in the program despite no availability. Transparency is my #1 priority in
everything I do, not just this campaign, and it's claims like yours that are the reason I operate this way. I don't have to say you're wrong because the evidence proves it.
So, what's your beef with me and/or Lucky Bit? Clearly you are upset about something, and I know it's not your status with the campaign because you never applied, so what's really bothering you?
