FastBluff.com is piloting a Signature Campaign! [Highest Paying Campaign]

[FastBluff]

Ok..  can you tell me how to update my sig to the other bright colored one? never mind that, can I use this one?

⚀ Fastbluff ⚁⚃ || 1% House Edge Dice Game || Instant Payouts || Thread

I have updated my sig with this one, if it is not accepted, pls tell me and I will change it to default one. Thanks

Yes this is fine.

[1714888042]

1714888042

[1714888042]

1714888042

[1714888042]

1714888042

[1714888042]

1714888042

[1714888042]

1714888042

[FastBluff]

Great, so I'm continuing with this campagin on the premise that it's still weekly.

Thanks fastbluff and I hope that you can work out the issues with twitter/macaffee soon.

Ok so your post count is going to start at 202. And you want us to use the same address?

[sed]

Great, so I'm continuing with this campagin on the premise that it's still weekly.

Thanks fastbluff and I hope that you can work out the issues with twitter/macaffee soon.

Ok so your post count is going to start at 202. And you want us to use the same address?

Yes, of course the same address.  But why on earth should my post count start at 202?  It should certainly start at whatever it was at when you paid me last week.  I haven't taken down your signature in the mean time?  Why would you refuse to pay for posts made with your signature?

I'll have to check to see exactly where I was at when you paid me last, but I believe it was in the low 190s.  That should be my starting post count.

To emphasize: I have worn your advertizement all week.  I have posted with your signature nearly 10 posts already this week.  I can't understand why you would refuse to pay for posts made with your signature in place?  If this is truly the case, I would consider it to be a deal breaker.  Please clarify as soon as possible.

EDIT: I checked the dates on my posts, as far as I can tell you last paid me at post 195.  So this should be my starting post count this week.  If that's not the way things work, then I'm pretty dissatisfied and I'll be resigning immediately.  Just waiting to (hopefully) hear that there's some simple misunderstanding here.

[FastBluff]

Great, so I'm continuing with this campagin on the premise that it's still weekly.

Thanks fastbluff and I hope that you can work out the issues with twitter/macaffee soon.

Ok so your post count is going to start at 202. And you want us to use the same address?

Yes, of course the same address.  But why on earth should my post count start at 202?  It should certainly start at whatever it was at when you paid me last week.  I haven't taken down your signature in the mean time?  Why would you refuse to pay for posts made with your signature?

I'll have to check to see exactly where I was at when you paid me last, but I believe it was in the low 190s.  That should be my starting post count.

To emphasize: I have worn your advertizement all week.  I have posted with your signature nearly 10 posts already this week.  I can't understand why you would refuse to pay for posts made with your signature in place?  If this is truly the case, I would consider it to be a deal breaker.  Please clarify as soon as possible.

Your post count is starting at 202, because in our pm to you about the first report, we asked you to confirm if you were continuing with us, you have just responded to that pm now. I am sorry but we have to take our post count from when you confirmed you were staying in the campaign. We can't bend this rule, as other people followed this and it would be unfair to them.

[sed]

Great, so I'm continuing with this campagin on the premise that it's still weekly.

Thanks fastbluff and I hope that you can work out the issues with twitter/macaffee soon.

Ok so your post count is going to start at 202. And you want us to use the same address?

Yes, of course the same address.  But why on earth should my post count start at 202?  It should certainly start at whatever it was at when you paid me last week.  I haven't taken down your signature in the mean time?  Why would you refuse to pay for posts made with your signature?

I'll have to check to see exactly where I was at when you paid me last, but I believe it was in the low 190s.  That should be my starting post count.

To emphasize: I have worn your advertizement all week.  I have posted with your signature nearly 10 posts already this week.  I can't understand why you would refuse to pay for posts made with your signature in place?  If this is truly the case, I would consider it to be a deal breaker.  Please clarify as soon as possible.

Your post count is starting at 202, because in our pm to you about the first report, we asked you to confirm if you were continuing with us, you have just responded to that pm now. I am sorry but we have to take our post count from when you confirmed you were staying in the campaign. We can't bend this rule, as other people followed this and it would be unfair to them.

What?!

I'm sorry but if I'm wearing your advertizement in my signature space, how is that not a confirmation that I'm staying with the program?

Do you really, honestly, think that someone would wear your advertizement in their signature space and not expect to be paid for it?  I was away over the weekend and therefore I did not reply to your pm immediately.  Still, your advertizement was up on my posts over this time period, why do you think you should get that for free?

This morning I added nearly 10 more posts in good faith advertizing for you.  Now you reply to me in the evening and say, "ok, i just caught up with you and i'm putting you back in at your current post count"??

If this is really the way your program works then consider this:

1. You pay for a given week.
2. You are now getting free advertizing because you won't pay for any posts until you "reconfirm" people
3. People say, ok, please let me reconfirm.
4. You eventually reconfirm them and you don't have to to pay for posts between steps 2--4!?

Obviously, under your system, I would immediately remove your ad upon payment and wait for you to "reconfirm" me before I put your ad back.

Finally, can you please explain how this is "unfair to everyone else" if you simply pay people for the posts that they made in good faith with your signature?  How many free advertizments (unpaid posts) did you get from everyone else?  Why wouldn't you simply pay them for the advertizing you got?

I think the obvious fair thing is to pay everyone for the advertizing that you got from them.  If you are not willing to reconsider, I'll be resigning from the program as soon as possible.

[FastBluff]

Great, so I'm continuing with this campagin on the premise that it's still weekly.

Thanks fastbluff and I hope that you can work out the issues with twitter/macaffee soon.

Ok so your post count is going to start at 202. And you want us to use the same address?

Yes, of course the same address.  But why on earth should my post count start at 202?  It should certainly start at whatever it was at when you paid me last week.  I haven't taken down your signature in the mean time?  Why would you refuse to pay for posts made with your signature?

I'll have to check to see exactly where I was at when you paid me last, but I believe it was in the low 190s.  That should be my starting post count.

To emphasize: I have worn your advertizement all week.  I have posted with your signature nearly 10 posts already this week.  I can't understand why you would refuse to pay for posts made with your signature in place?  If this is truly the case, I would consider it to be a deal breaker.  Please clarify as soon as possible.

Your post count is starting at 202, because in our pm to you about the first report, we asked you to confirm if you were continuing with us, you have just responded to that pm now. I am sorry but we have to take our post count from when you confirmed you were staying in the campaign. We can't bend this rule, as other people followed this and it would be unfair to them.

What?!

I'm sorry but if I'm wearing your advertizement in my signature space, how is that not a confirmation that I'm staying with the program?

Do you really, honestly, think that someone would wear your advertizement in their signature space and not expect to be paid for it?  I was away over the weekend and therefore I did not reply to your pm immediately.  Still, your advertizement was up on my posts over this time period, why do you think you should get that for free?

This morning I added nearly 10 more posts in good faith advertizing for you.  Now you reply to me in the evening and say, "ok, i just caught up with you and i'm putting you back in at your current post count"??

If this is really the way your program works then consider this:

1. You pay for a given week.
2. You are now getting free advertizing because you won't pay for any posts until you "reconfirm" people
3. People say, ok, please let me reconfirm.
4. You eventually reconfirm them and you don't have to to pay for posts between steps 2--4!?

Obviously, under your system, I would immediately remove your ad upon payment and wait for you to "reconfirm" me before I put your ad back.

Finally, can you please explain how this is "unfair to everyone else" if you simply pay me for the posts that I made in good faith with your signature?

I think the obvious fair thing is to pay for the advertizing that you got.  If you are not willing to reconsider, I'll be resigning from the program as soon as possible.

I am sorry but I will not be continuing this in the thread. You can pm us if you are unhappy, but everyone else was able to follow it. We have been extremely easy on the rules we set, and we even overpaid for our first signature campaign week. So for you to be dissatisfied, is really unfair to us. We are willing to work with you, but we can't bend rules that majority of people were able to follow. It just isn't fair to us and our clients.

[sed]

Great, so I'm continuing with this campagin on the premise that it's still weekly.

Thanks fastbluff and I hope that you can work out the issues with twitter/macaffee soon.

Ok so your post count is going to start at 202. And you want us to use the same address?

Yes, of course the same address.  But why on earth should my post count start at 202?  It should certainly start at whatever it was at when you paid me last week.  I haven't taken down your signature in the mean time?  Why would you refuse to pay for posts made with your signature?

I'll have to check to see exactly where I was at when you paid me last, but I believe it was in the low 190s.  That should be my starting post count.

To emphasize: I have worn your advertizement all week.  I have posted with your signature nearly 10 posts already this week.  I can't understand why you would refuse to pay for posts made with your signature in place?  If this is truly the case, I would consider it to be a deal breaker.  Please clarify as soon as possible.

Your post count is starting at 202, because in our pm to you about the first report, we asked you to confirm if you were continuing with us, you have just responded to that pm now. I am sorry but we have to take our post count from when you confirmed you were staying in the campaign. We can't bend this rule, as other people followed this and it would be unfair to them.

What?!

I'm sorry but if I'm wearing your advertizement in my signature space, how is that not a confirmation that I'm staying with the program?

Do you really, honestly, think that someone would wear your advertizement in their signature space and not expect to be paid for it?  I was away over the weekend and therefore I did not reply to your pm immediately.  Still, your advertizement was up on my posts over this time period, why do you think you should get that for free?

This morning I added nearly 10 more posts in good faith advertizing for you.  Now you reply to me in the evening and say, "ok, i just caught up with you and i'm putting you back in at your current post count"??

If this is really the way your program works then consider this:

1. You pay for a given week.
2. You are now getting free advertizing because you won't pay for any posts until you "reconfirm" people
3. People say, ok, please let me reconfirm.
4. You eventually reconfirm them and you don't have to to pay for posts between steps 2--4!?

Obviously, under your system, I would immediately remove your ad upon payment and wait for you to "reconfirm" me before I put your ad back.

Finally, can you please explain how this is "unfair to everyone else" if you simply pay me for the posts that I made in good faith with your signature?

I think the obvious fair thing is to pay for the advertizing that you got.  If you are not willing to reconsider, I'll be resigning from the program as soon as possible.

I am sorry but I will not be continuing this in the thread. You can pm us if you are unhappy, but everyone else was able to follow it. We have been extremely easy on the rules we set, and we even overpaid for our first signature campaign week. So for you to be dissatisfied, is really unfair to us. We are willing to work with you, but we can't bend rules that majority of people were able to follow. It just isn't fair to us and our clients.

I'd be happy to continue the conversation in PM if you have anything more to say.  For the moment, I see that you refuse to pay for posts made in good faith bearing your advertizment.  Your reasoning for this is vague.  You just say "it's not fair to us and our clients".  But you haven't addressed the obvious fact that your "system" is just a way to get free posts each week by refusing to pay for posts between the time you paid for last week and whenever you decide to "reconfirm" someone the following week.  No other ad campaigns work this way, and you know it.  There's no reason to refuse to pay for advertizing done between the time you pay and the time that you "reconfirm" and you know that too.  If you can offer something more than a trite "that's the rules, I'm sorry",  I'd be happy to hear it.

In the meantime I've left negative feedback describing the situation (I know it doesn't mean much since I'm not in the default trust ring but it's really all I can do).  I would say that you owe me for the posts I've already made this week but since your refusal to pay me for this posts is the crux of our disagreement, I've just left that as the amount risked (a paltry 0.006BTC).  I'm actually quite surprised that you would take such a strong stand to risk your good reputation and leave a contractor dissatisfied over 0.006BTC.  I would have thought that you would have taken the rational approach of viewing the facts of the argument (sed advertized for me, I should probably simply resolve the error in my system so that people who advertize for me are getting paid for it).  However, it appears that it's more valuable to you to "stick to your guns" over this system than to make things right.

If you want me to remove the negative feedback, simply pay me for the advertizing I've done for you and I'll remove it.  Good luck in the future.

[williamj2543]

Talk to this topic and get on their list https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.0
Increase your limit by a bit. If you get to 125 posts a week you will be the actual highest paying campaign. You have the same rates as primedice but you pay weekly. After the primedice campaign I would probably switch to you if you increased the limit to 100 at least, and you prove payouts.

[FastBluff]

Great, so I'm continuing with this campagin on the premise that it's still weekly.

Thanks fastbluff and I hope that you can work out the issues with twitter/macaffee soon.

Ok so your post count is going to start at 202. And you want us to use the same address?

Yes, of course the same address.  But why on earth should my post count start at 202?  It should certainly start at whatever it was at when you paid me last week.  I haven't taken down your signature in the mean time?  Why would you refuse to pay for posts made with your signature?

I'll have to check to see exactly where I was at when you paid me last, but I believe it was in the low 190s.  That should be my starting post count.

To emphasize: I have worn your advertizement all week.  I have posted with your signature nearly 10 posts already this week.  I can't understand why you would refuse to pay for posts made with your signature in place?  If this is truly the case, I would consider it to be a deal breaker.  Please clarify as soon as possible.

Your post count is starting at 202, because in our pm to you about the first report, we asked you to confirm if you were continuing with us, you have just responded to that pm now. I am sorry but we have to take our post count from when you confirmed you were staying in the campaign. We can't bend this rule, as other people followed this and it would be unfair to them.

What?!

I'm sorry but if I'm wearing your advertizement in my signature space, how is that not a confirmation that I'm staying with the program?

Do you really, honestly, think that someone would wear your advertizement in their signature space and not expect to be paid for it?  I was away over the weekend and therefore I did not reply to your pm immediately.  Still, your advertizement was up on my posts over this time period, why do you think you should get that for free?

This morning I added nearly 10 more posts in good faith advertizing for you.  Now you reply to me in the evening and say, "ok, i just caught up with you and i'm putting you back in at your current post count"??

If this is really the way your program works then consider this:

1. You pay for a given week.
2. You are now getting free advertizing because you won't pay for any posts until you "reconfirm" people
3. People say, ok, please let me reconfirm.
4. You eventually reconfirm them and you don't have to to pay for posts between steps 2--4!?

Obviously, under your system, I would immediately remove your ad upon payment and wait for you to "reconfirm" me before I put your ad back.

Finally, can you please explain how this is "unfair to everyone else" if you simply pay me for the posts that I made in good faith with your signature?

I think the obvious fair thing is to pay for the advertizing that you got.  If you are not willing to reconsider, I'll be resigning from the program as soon as possible.

I am sorry but I will not be continuing this in the thread. You can pm us if you are unhappy, but everyone else was able to follow it. We have been extremely easy on the rules we set, and we even overpaid for our first signature campaign week. So for you to be dissatisfied, is really unfair to us. We are willing to work with you, but we can't bend rules that majority of people were able to follow. It just isn't fair to us and our clients.

I'd be happy to continue the conversation in PM if you have anything more to say.  For the moment, I see that you refuse to pay for posts made in good faith bearing your advertizment.  Your reasoning for this is vague.  You just say "it's not fair to us and our clients".  But you haven't address the obvious fact that you "system" is just a way to get free posts each week by refusing to pay for posts between the time you paid for last week and whenever you decide to "reconfirm" someone the following week.  No other ad campaigns work this way, and you know it.  There's no reason to refuse to pay for advertizing done between the time you pay and the time that you "reconfirm" and you know that too.  If you can offer something more than a vague "that's the rules, I'm sorry".  I'd be happy to hear it.

In the meantime I've left negative feedback describing the situation (I know it doesn't mean much since I'm not in the default trust ring but it's really all I can do).  I would say that you owe me for the posts I've already made this week but since your refusal to pay me for this posts is the crux of our disagreement, I've just left that as the amount risked.  If you want me to remove the negative feedback, simply pay me for the advertizing I've done for you and I'll remove it.

We have left you negative feedback, as we set up a policy you didn't follow it. You are now not eligible to be in any of contest or signature campaign. Please stop spamming this thread as we will report it to a mod, if you want you can pm us to continue, but we have made our case very clear.

[FastBluff]

Talk to this topic and get on their list https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.0
Increase your limit by a bit. If you get to 125 posts a week you will be the actual highest paying campaign. You have the same rates as primedice but you pay weekly. After the primedice campaign I would probably switch to you if you increased the limit to 100 at least, and you prove payouts.

We will not be changing the limits anytime soon. We have proved payouts, don't let one person who is obviously just wants to scam us, make this perfect campaign into something it isn't.


Payout: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=684966.msg7897240#msg7897240

[sed]

Talk to this topic and get on their list https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.0
Increase your limit by a bit. If you get to 125 posts a week you will be the actual highest paying campaign. You have the same rates as primedice but you pay weekly. After the primedice campaign I would probably switch to you if you increased the limit to 100 at least, and you prove payouts.

We will not be changing the limits anytime soon. We have proved payouts, don't let one person who is obviously just wants to scam us, make this perfect campaign into something it isn't.

I'm sorry but you are accusing me of wanting to "scam" you?  That's a little crazy dude.

I am accusing you of not paying for advertizments made in good faith.  I have left feedback to this effect.  If you want to resolve it, we can talk about that further in PM.  In the meantime, your threatening tone really just makes you look worse.

Good luck with your endeavours.

[FastBluff]

Talk to this topic and get on their list https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.0
Increase your limit by a bit. If you get to 125 posts a week you will be the actual highest paying campaign. You have the same rates as primedice but you pay weekly. After the primedice campaign I would probably switch to you if you increased the limit to 100 at least, and you prove payouts.

We will not be changing the limits anytime soon. We have proved payouts, don't let one person who is obviously just wants to scam us, make this perfect campaign into something it isn't.

I'm sorry but you are accusing me of wanting to "scam" you?  That's a little crazy dude.

I am accusing you of not paying for advertizments made in good faith.  I have left feedback to this effect.  If you want to resolve it, we can talk about that further in PM.  In the meantime, your threatening tone really just makes you look worse.

Good luck with your endeavours.

You are trying to scam us, as we over paid you for unconstructive post to show good faith and now you are not following the policy and accused us of scamming. I am sorry but this is called scamming in my books. Now please stop spamming our thread.

[sed]

Talk to this topic and get on their list https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.0
Increase your limit by a bit. If you get to 125 posts a week you will be the actual highest paying campaign. You have the same rates as primedice but you pay weekly. After the primedice campaign I would probably switch to you if you increased the limit to 100 at least, and you prove payouts.

We will not be changing the limits anytime soon. We have proved payouts, don't let one person who is obviously just wants to scam us, make this perfect campaign into something it isn't.

I'm sorry but you are accusing me of wanting to "scam" you?  That's a little crazy dude.

I am accusing you of not paying for advertizments made in good faith.  I have left feedback to this effect.  If you want to resolve it, we can talk about that further in PM.  In the meantime, your threatening tone really just makes you look worse.

Good luck with your endeavours.

You are trying to scam us, as we over paid you for unconstructive post to show good faith and now you are not following the policy and accused us of scamming. I am sorry but this is called scamming in my books. Now please stop spamming our thread.

I am not spamming your thread.  I am replying publically to accusations which you are making about me publically.  If you don't want me to respond, then stop accusing.

From your PM to me:

Some notes we made while reading your post, you performanced as one of the best posters. Keep up the good work!

So, by "you performed as one of the best posters" I guess I'm suppose to understand something about overpaying for unconstructive posts?!

It's obvious to anyone who is reading this thread that I am not "scamming".  I made 10 posts with your signature this week and you say you will not pay because I didn't get "reconfirmed".  I consider this to be a terribly dishonest system, one that's meant to steal a few free posts each week.  No other campaign does this.  Obviously your campaign is new, you could have just said "ok, you're right, that's not fair to have you advertizing for us without us paying.  Let's change the system."  Instead you are playing hard-ass with your system and I have left feedback accordingly.

Good luck in your future.

[FastBluff]

Talk to this topic and get on their list https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.0
Increase your limit by a bit. If you get to 125 posts a week you will be the actual highest paying campaign. You have the same rates as primedice but you pay weekly. After the primedice campaign I would probably switch to you if you increased the limit to 100 at least, and you prove payouts.

We will not be changing the limits anytime soon. We have proved payouts, don't let one person who is obviously just wants to scam us, make this perfect campaign into something it isn't.

I'm sorry but you are accusing me of wanting to "scam" you?  That's a little crazy dude.

I am accusing you of not paying for advertizments made in good faith.  I have left feedback to this effect.  If you want to resolve it, we can talk about that further in PM.  In the meantime, your threatening tone really just makes you look worse.

Good luck with your endeavours.

You are trying to scam us, as we over paid you for unconstructive post to show good faith and now you are not following the policy and accused us of scamming. I am sorry but this is called scamming in my books. Now please stop spamming our thread.

I am not spamming your thread.  I am replying publically to accusations which you are making about me publically.  If you don't want me to respond, then stop accusing.

From your PM to me:

Some notes we made while reading your post, you performanced as one of the best posters. Keep up the good work!

So, by "you performed as one of the best posters" I guess I'm suppose to understand something about overpaying for unconstructive posts?!

It's obvious to anyone who is reading this thread that I am not "scamming".  I made 10 posts with your signature this week and you say you will not pay because I didn't get "reconfirmed".  I consider this to be a terribly dishonest system, one that's meant to steal a few free posts each week.  No other campaign does this.  Obviously your campaign is new, you could have just said "ok, you're right, that's not fair to have you advertizing for us without us paying.  Let's change the system."  Instead you are playing hard-ass with your system and I have left feedback accordingly.

Good luck in your future.

First off to be one of the best posters, you had to make at least 30 post that were considered constructive, but we paid for the full 50 post no matter what they were, to overcome any trust issues of not paying.

We are dishonest because we wanted people to reconfirmed as this is a weekly campaign, and we want to open up more spots for more people that will be doing us a service. I am sorry you are angry at the way things are done here, but these are our policies, if you don't agree please leave. As this is a thread for business, not whining because you were away.

We were extremely easy on the rules in the beginning and I am surprised that a person would even be angry at making money they didn't earn.

If you post in this thread again we will report to the mods as now this is off topic and you are trolling.

[tspacepilot]

We have left you negative feedback, as we set up a policy you didn't follow it. You are now not eligible to be in any of contest or signature campaign. Please stop spamming this thread as we will report it to a mod, if you want you can pm us to continue, but we have made our case very clear.

Actually both of you guys can leave each other all of the negative feedback you want.  No one will see it until one of you gets into the default trust ring aaaaaaand, that's looking pretty unlikely for either of you at the moment.

Anyway, I'm not involved in this campaign but it does seem like fastbluff's policy is pretty wack, I haven't seen any other campaigns doing this.  But sed going directly to negative feedback also seems extreme.  Why don't you guys both forgive each other and walk away with clean reps?

[sed]

Talk to this topic and get on their list https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.0
Increase your limit by a bit. If you get to 125 posts a week you will be the actual highest paying campaign. You have the same rates as primedice but you pay weekly. After the primedice campaign I would probably switch to you if you increased the limit to 100 at least, and you prove payouts.

We will not be changing the limits anytime soon. We have proved payouts, don't let one person who is obviously just wants to scam us, make this perfect campaign into something it isn't.

I'm sorry but you are accusing me of wanting to "scam" you?  That's a little crazy dude.

I am accusing you of not paying for advertizments made in good faith.  I have left feedback to this effect.  If you want to resolve it, we can talk about that further in PM.  In the meantime, your threatening tone really just makes you look worse.

Good luck with your endeavours.

You are trying to scam us, as we over paid you for unconstructive post to show good faith and now you are not following the policy and accused us of scamming. I am sorry but this is called scamming in my books. Now please stop spamming our thread.

I am not spamming your thread.  I am replying publically to accusations which you are making about me publically.  If you don't want me to respond, then stop accusing.

From your PM to me:

Some notes we made while reading your post, you performanced as one of the best posters. Keep up the good work!

So, by "you performed as one of the best posters" I guess I'm suppose to understand something about overpaying for unconstructive posts?!

It's obvious to anyone who is reading this thread that I am not "scamming".  I made 10 posts with your signature this week and you say you will not pay because I didn't get "reconfirmed".  I consider this to be a terribly dishonest system, one that's meant to steal a few free posts each week.  No other campaign does this.  Obviously your campaign is new, you could have just said "ok, you're right, that's not fair to have you advertizing for us without us paying.  Let's change the system."  Instead you are playing hard-ass with your system and I have left feedback accordingly.

Good luck in your future.

First off to be one of the best posters, you had to make at least 30 post that were considered constructive, but we paid for the full 50 post no matter what they were, to overcome any trust issues of not paying.

Actually you paid me for 24 out of 25 posts that I made that week.  I'm not sure what the issue was with the 25th post but this is not relevant to the problem.  I don't see how paying me for 24 out of 25 posts and saying "you were one of the best posters" is somehow overpaying me.  I'd say that you paid me the right amount and I don't have any problem with this.

We are dishonest because we wanted people to reconfirmed as this is a weekly campaign, and we want to open up more spots for more people that will be doing us a service. I am sorry you are angry at the way things are done here, but these are our policies, if you don't agree please leave. As this is a thread for business, not whining because you were away.

What's dishonest is that you don't want to pay for posts made with your advertizment during the time while we wait to be "reconfirmed".  Again, no other sig campaign does this.  As for leaving, I've already done so.  As for business, I find it quite relevant to business that you have this "policy" to not pay for certain posts each week.

We were extremely easy on the rules in the beginning and I am surprised that a person would even be angry at making money they didn't earn.

You keep bringing this up about being "extremely easy", etc.  I don't have a problem with your "easiness".  I don't really even understand what you're getting at.  You paid me exactly correctly for the first week and there's no issue there.  My issue is that you don't want to pay me for advertizment in the second week.  As for anger, I don't have anger, I have a valid claim.  I'm sorta sad that you would rather deal with all of this accusation and feedback and whatnot rather than just reconsider a strange policy, but it's your business.  My business is simply to request payment for work completed.

If you post in this thread again we will report to the mods as now this is off topic and you are trolling.

I'd be happy to hear what mods say about this.  I'm obviously not trolling if I keep having to reply to your accusations about me and motivations.  If you stop bringing me up in this thread, I'll stop replying.  Let's talk to the adults, maybe they'll help you calm down and think about things more clearly, idk.

[FastBluff]

Could you explain this "reconfirmation" process, OP? Are you not paying members during the time they are advertising for you, while they are not "confirmed"?

FYI, accusing your members of "scamming" over this is extremely unprofessional. Bit777 made the same mistake and it reflected horribly on his business.

He is extorting and trying get us to paid for something he is not entitled to, that is called scamming to us and our investors. We have been extremely professional.

The reconfirmation is just sending a pm back to us when we pm you, that you wish to continue with us. We have limited spaces and this is how we can know if we can add more people. Many people want to be part of our campaign so this is how try to fit them in.

[sed]

Could you explain this "reconfirmation" process, OP? Are you not paying members during the time they are advertising for you, while they are not "confirmed"?

FYI, accusing your members of "scamming" over this is extremely unprofessional. Bit777 made the same mistake and it reflected horribly on his business.

He is extorting and trying get us to paid for something he is not entitled to, that is called scamming to us and our investors. We have been extremely professional.

The reconfirmation is just sending a pm back to us when we pm you, that you wish to continue with us. We have limited spaces and this is how we can know if we can add more people. Many people want to be part of our campaign so this is how try to fit them in.

poeEDgar,  I hope I can clarify.  I was paid at post 195 and I was expected to send a pm to "reenroll".  I didn't know this so I began posting.  I later dropped a message in this thread to say I was of course continuing and was told my starting post for the week would be 202.  I disagreed because I had kept the advertiziment on the whole time and had posted approx 10 times since he was "reconfirming" me.  This is the crux of the disagreement.  I removed myself from the campaign and left negative feedback for 0.006BTC (payment for the 10 posts).  That really got him into gear and how he's accussing me of "scamming" and of "whining" and other things (which I wouldn't exactly call "extremely professsional" but everyone has their own opinions about that).

I also sent him a pm to try to discuss in private but he just says he's convinced I'm trying to scam him now.  So I guess that's what's going on.  Somehow this amounts to me "extorting" him.  I also opened a flame war thread for him in case it helps him blow off some steam (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=705946.new#new) but he hasn't taken advantage of that yet.

Finally, I can addres this:

Are you not paying members during the time they are advertising for you, while they are not "confirmed"?

That is exactly the crux of my issue.  I was not paid for advertizing for him from Thursday to Tuesday because I was "unconfirmed". When he did reconfirm me, he did so at my post count on Tuesday afternoon rather than my post count as of Thursday night.  So from Thursday to Tuesday was unpaid advertizing and this is why I left the campaign.

[FastBluff]

We are not paying you end of story, you didn't follow the policy can you now leave this thread. You are just off-topic, and the mods will start cleaning this thread after you leave.

[sed]

We are not paying you end of story, you didn't follow the policy can you now leave this thread. You are just off-topic, and the mods will start cleaning this thread after you leave.

Replying to poeEDgar's question is not off-topic.  I think that there's a reason that people want to clarify what happened to me.

You keep threatening me with "the mods".  It's really not a scary threat.  I'm doing my best to interact professionally.  If the "mods" decide I'm in the wrong, I can deal with that.

Honestly, I'm sorry that we weren't able to communicate better.  I personally think it's a shame that you decided to go the "hard-line" approach with your policy rather than taking a moment to evaluate whether it was fair to refuse to pay people for advertizing for your site.  I really would have thought you would have been a little less rash given your otherwise thoughtful approach to this campaign.

For other people it will be very obvious that you don't pay for certain posts, and they'll have that knowledge going in so they won't be surprised.  For me, I was surprised and I consider it a breach of good faith/trust.  I think it's fair to discuss that in public since this is a public campaign.