Rules in the signature campaign, weird or not?

[PX-Z]

As i understand, it's really just like the team's decision, and it's really odd for the part of participants. For this to happen, participants should not make posts related to games, scam accusation threads related to casino and gambling because even those threads posted on other boards have a chance to be moved to gambling boards, thus making them waste their whole seven days on the campaign.

[Husires]

Before the representative were banned in Bitcointalk we never got an explanation from them about this rule yet they enforced it and excluded some of their campaign participants from their campaign without payment.

They also have this rule that signature campaign payments are sent to a wallet address within the service, I don't know if they control those wallets or not but they can restrict you from withdrawing due to non-compliance with the service rules.

You must provide a bech32 address from your Cryptomus wallet.

[Rengga Jati]

I assume Royse777 made the rule because of the request of Cryptomus team/developer. It is the first time that Royse777 forbids the participants to post in gambling discussion or gambling thread. Usually, Royse777 never forbids the participants to post in gambling board. If there is a such aggressive rule, the most logical reason must be caused by the request of project team. However, I don't think it is a weird rule. Each project has its own target in promoting their project in the forum.

Anyway, I don't see Royse's comments/answers here. He is the person who has the responsibility to answer this question. If you want to know it clearly, just contact him directly.

[SamReomo]

We haven't yet got any official reply from Royse but of course it's a quite tough rule for the participants because the participants who are part of that campaign need to be careful when making posts as any post in gambling threads is going to ruin their whole week's work.

I believe such rule should be modified and instead of not paying the participants for their posts in other boards, the rule should deduct some amount from their weekly earnings and they may get a warning that if they keep posting in gambling boards then they may get replaced by other members of the forum.

Although, that's also going to be aggressive but if an advertiser wants to forbid some boards then a manager has to make such rules, and I'm very sure the rule was added only because of the advertiser's demand.

[Findingnemo]

Rules maybe odd than usual but at the end of the day, what's best for the product is getting promoted will be put into consideration so if the company things associating themselves with gambling may be bad for their reputation then they're allowed to do such things and anyone who doesn't want to take part in can chose not to participate in the campaign.

Atleast he mentioned is clear cut in the rules itself to avoid any confusion later.

[Lucius]

I believe that everyone has the right to determine the rules of their campaign, even if those rules do not make sense to everyone. One sig campaign that was present on BTT for a long time had a rule that you cannot be a member if you have a political opinion on certain things, and actually asked for neutrality and non-participation in political discussions.

Even that makes sense to me, but personally I would never participate in a campaign where I literally have to be careful in which board I write, or if I have to be careful if I write that someone or something is bad/evil just because it is not politically correct for someone.

[dkbit98]

However, the new campaigns brought some unusual rules, somewhat unclear. at least for me.
Cryptomus have quite unusual rules. Not only are posts in the gambling section not counted, but they lead to disqualification for payment.

This new rule is stupid, to restrictive, pro-censorship, and anti-forum in my opinion.
I would understand if some company don't want to count any posts that are written in gambling section, but they can't eliminate all other posts written in other boards.
I don't know who exactly came up with this rule, but he should be heavily criticized for this.

[target]

Its weird the they will disqualify participants of the campaign upon posting gambling discussion. They could just don't count the posts at least they will not keep hiring.

Why they are doing this is probably because the payment methkd disallow payments coming from casinos. So they do not walt to be linked to a casino.

[KingsDen]

Why they are doing this is probably because the payment methkd disallow payments coming from casinos. So they do not walt to be linked to a casino.

Royse mentioned in the other forum that the principle of cryptomus doesn't support gambling or casino. I really said to myself that I'll investigate the project in relation to casinos but I never had the time.
However, it is only nice he deny payment and maybe find another means of discouraging posts in gambling. In the other hand, anywho who read and understood the campaign rules and still applied should be able to keep to whatever rules were given him.

[PX-Z]

Why they are doing this is probably because the payment methkd disallow payments coming from casinos. So they do not walt to be linked to a casino.

Posting gambling related posts doesn't have to with that, it does not any connection for paying from casinos. It also doesn't mean the user is keep gambling, while posting there.

The one who posted above that it's all about the team and project's principles is true. But what would they think about the old posts of users who posted on gambling boards because their signatures will still show on those gambling related threads, so they were will be still somewhat connected on gambling from those posts ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

[Freemind]

Someone already mentioned that they started the campaign themselves on the Btt forum.
It was quite clumsy and amateurish, then they wrote this rule about not writing in certain parts of the forum. After the ban on Btt, they realized that they should let someone more professional manage their campaigns.
However, it is very strange that the manager did not manage to explain to them the senselessness of such a rule.

Based on the information you mention, maybe this rule is "enforced" by the team that hired the manager, since I don't think the manager himself writes that rule without discussing it with the team. But it still seems like a mistake to me. Let no one think that I am talking about the professionalism of the manager or even that of the team, but a rule like this makes no sense, especially in this forum.

I don't know how they did it in BTT, but I have always thought that an experienced manager is the best for these cases, it saves a lot of work and offers better results from my point of view.

[Findingnemo]

I don't know how they did it in BTT, but I have always thought that an experienced manager is the best for these cases, it saves a lot of work and offers better results from my point of view.

Let's assume coinbase is running a signature campaign and they block any account with no questions because they don't want their platform associated with gambling or it's due to the restrictions on gambling platforms in US but either way company decide based on what's best for them.

And I agree that manager could have used a rule like posts in gambling discussion will not be counted towards paid post's instead of completely ruling out then but as I said company must have insisted or unless Royce would have gone with his usual rules.

[JoyMarsha]

Reading about the rule sounds weird, knowing how gambling posts have been part of people's post count in the forum. All the same, that's how the campaign project and the campaign manager want the campaign to be run. It's left for the accepted members of the campaign to avoid posting on the gambling board. If they can't stay off from gambling posts, they shouldn't be part of the campaign promoters. It's a choice, join or not.

[kai]

.....
However, the new campaigns brought some unusual rules, somewhat unclear. at least for me.
Cryptomus have quite unusual rules. Not only are posts in the gambling section not counted, but they lead to disqualification for payment.

• Posting in gambling-related boards and threads will disqualify payment for the week.

I would really like to hear a meaningful explanation for such an aggressive rule, isn't it enough to just not count posts in gambling? Some users write there regardless of the signature payment, why such a restriction?

May I give my opinion about my personality who lives in the surrounding environment?
It seems that the founder of Cryptomus is a Muslim, so he created a platform and marketed it must be Halal or not contrary to Islamic law.

As far as I know, in Islam, gambling is strictly prohibited so that Cryptomus for its campaign prohibits posting on the gambling board section. This is just my personal opinion and please ignore my post if I violate the forum rules because I bring religion into the cryptocurrency discussion.

[examplens]

Based on the information you mention, maybe this rule is "enforced" by the team that hired the manager, since I don't think the manager himself writes that rule without discussing it with the team. But it still seems like a mistake to me. Let no one think that I am talking about the professionalism of the manager or even that of the team, but a rule like this makes no sense, especially in this forum.

It must be the decision of the campaign owner. They initially tried to run a campaign on Btt by themselves (it didn't end well) and this was one of the rules. I'm more surprised that the manager didn't manage to talk them out of it.

May I give my opinion about my personality who lives in the surrounding environment?
It seems that the founder of Cryptomus is a Muslim, so he created a platform and marketed it must be Halal or not contrary to Islamic law.

As far as I know, in Islam, gambling is strictly prohibited so that Cryptomus for its campaign prohibits posting on the gambling board section. This is just my personal opinion and please ignore my post if I violate the forum rules because I bring religion into the cryptocurrency discussion.

To be honest, this sounds the closest to a logical explanation. Although at least the little I know about the Muslim faith, similar restrictions are missing here.
I still think that disqualification from the campaign is a bad choice, it is enough just not to count such posts. In the end, if their product is aimed at all people from all over the world, why discriminate against people who gamble or any group?