GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
24th Apr. 2024, at 12:22 am CEST#341
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
T0uchTheSky wrote on 24/04/2024 00:21:
Oh ok, as I said, programming something like that is no problem for Counter. And the people who don't want to use the forum anyway, except for these 100 posts, would certainly not spam the forum if they knew that only 1 or 2 posts per day are counted.
Yes, I was aware that it could be realized with little effort. But I just wanted to limit the points farming, because many people only qualify with gz comments
Yes, I was aware that it could be realized with little effort. But I just wanted to additionally limit the point farming, because many people only qualify with gz commis
Yes, for this GZ crap you should probably only get 1 point or no points at all.
It's marvelous how some people think they can put you in a drawer... So let's take notes again ... I've been an active member here for 6 years ... I've written 96 posts in these years until a few days ago.... and none of them were just short larifari posts to somehow get a win from it. I was missing 4 posts and yes I wrote them briefly to get to 100... here it is presented as if I had written the 100 posts in one day just to get the reward. Honestly, here at gamblejoe it's all about casinos ect... and not about making fun of other members just because you're at odds with yourself ... For those who always have the urge to bicker and stenker should register on websites where it's common practice.
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
24th Apr. 2024, at 11:24 am CEST#344
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
Linawayne31 wrote on 24.04.2024 at 11:10 am: Wonderful how some think to put you in a drawer... So again to write ... I have been an active member here for 6 years ... have written 96 posts in these years until a few days ago.... and all of them were not just short larifari written to somehow have a win from it. I was missing 4 posts and yes I wrote them briefly to get to 100... here it is presented as if I had written the 100 posts in one day just to get the reward. Honestly, here at gamblejoe it's about casinos ect... and not about making fun of other members just because you're at odds with yourself ... For those who always have the urge to bicker and stenker should register on websites where it's common practice.
not quite true...there were 6 posts in 15 minutes. The seventh was then the immediate question of how many reviews are remunerated. That's not a rant, but a comprehensible observation. By the way, arguing is commonplace at GambleJoe (at least on this topic) and that's the only reason we're here
Linawayne31 wrote on 24.04.2024 at 11:10 am: Wonderful how some think to put you in a drawer... So again to write ... I have been an active member here for 6 years ... have written 96 posts in these years until a few days ago.... and all of them were not just short larifari written to somehow have a win from it. I was missing 4 posts and yes I wrote them briefly to get to 100... here it is presented as if I had written the 100 posts in one day just to get the reward. Honestly, here at gamblejoe it's all about casinos ect... and not about making fun of other members just because you're at odds with yourself ... For those who always have the urge to bicker and stenker should register on websites where it's common practice.
Whether it's 4,5,6 doesn't matter. I also wrote that you were missing a maximum of 10 (by the way, you miscounted by 2 posts because there were 6 and not 4 that you needed).
Nobody wrote it like that. I also wondered why you were so eager, even though you were missing a few posts. It makes even less sense to dig up old threads for this. There are enough threads where you could have posted without annoying others.
Nor have I seen users here pigeonholing you or even making fun of you. Just a funny comment was made and you - for whatever reason - reacted very sensitively and indirectly insulted someone ("arguing as stupid") where the user never attacked you so directly.
Is it so difficult to admit that this may not have been handled wisely?
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
24th Apr. 2024, at 11:32 am CEST#346
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
😀😀😀😀 You mean the 101 ... I needed 100 contributions to get a reward, so the last one was no longer necessary. . Then it was just 6 .... but all the other 94 posts were not created within minutes. Already said that the last posts were written to have 100. These are the conditions, but I don't think it's bad if there are people who write an extra 100 posts in one day to fulfill the conditions.
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
24th Apr. 2024, at 11:37 am CEST#347
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
Linawayne31 wrote on 24.04.2024 at 11:32 am: 😀😀😀😀 The 101 you mean ... I needed 100 contributions to get compensation so the last one was no longer necessary. . Then it was just 6 .... but all the other 94 posts were not created within minutes. Already said that the last posts were written to have 100. These are the conditions, but I don't think it's bad if there are people who write an extra 100 posts in one day to fulfill the conditions.
it doesn't matter, you've reached 100 and are now happy. I don't think it makes much sense to continue the discussion, as it is also off-topic (but there are other reasons for this).
Linawayne31 wrote on 24.04.2024 at 11:32 am:These are the conditions, but I don't think it's bad if there are people who write an extra 100 posts in a day to fulfill the conditions.
that's exactly what would kill this forum if everyone would just fire meaningless posts in here to qualify for monetizing purposes. The attractiveness of the forum would immediately be completely ruined. The remuneration is not intended as a means to an end, but as a small reward for constructive cooperation. Unfortunately, it's hard to see with dollar signs in your eyes and as soon as one person has left their stuff here, the next one is already at the door. I had a look around the texts here: knowing full well that we are not a literary forum, I would neither publish nor reward at least a third of them. Cobbled-together junk without any substance + usable information that isn't even worth a euro. Let alone five euros. But that doesn't necessarily mean your reviews.
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
Nobody has liked this post so far
Yes, I was aware that it could be realized with little effort. But I just wanted to limit the points farming, because many people only qualify with gz comments
This post has been translated automatically
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
Liked this post:
frapi07
Yes, for this GZ crap you should probably only get 1 point or no points at all.
This post has been translated automatically
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
Liked this post:
gagapapamama, 
Lionking, 
Max_Bet
This post has been translated automatically
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
Nobody has liked this post so far
not quite true...there were 6 posts in 15 minutes. The seventh was then the immediate question of how many reviews are remunerated. That's not a rant, but a comprehensible observation. By the way, arguing is commonplace at GambleJoe (at least on this topic) and that's the only reason we're here
This post has been translated automatically
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
Liked this post:
Langhans
Whether it's 4,5,6 doesn't matter. I also wrote that you were missing a maximum of 10 (by the way, you miscounted by 2 posts because there were 6 and not 4 that you needed).
Nobody wrote it like that. I also wondered why you were so eager, even though you were missing a few posts. It makes even less sense to dig up old threads for this. There are enough threads where you could have posted without annoying others.
Nor have I seen users here pigeonholing you or even making fun of you. Just a funny comment was made and you - for whatever reason - reacted very sensitively and indirectly insulted someone ("arguing as stupid") where the user never attacked you so directly.
Is it so difficult to admit that this may not have been handled wisely?
This post has been translated automatically
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
Nobody has liked this post so far
it doesn't matter, you've reached 100 and are now happy. I don't think it makes much sense to continue the discussion, as it is also off-topic (but there are other reasons for this).
This post has been translated automatically
GambleJoe action: remuneration for gambling reviews
Liked this post:
gagapapamama
that's exactly what would kill this forum if everyone would just fire meaningless posts in here to qualify for monetizing purposes. The attractiveness of the forum would immediately be completely ruined. The remuneration is not intended as a means to an end, but as a small reward for constructive cooperation. Unfortunately, it's hard to see with dollar signs in your eyes and as soon as one person has left their stuff here, the next one is already at the door. I had a look around the texts here: knowing full well that we are not a literary forum, I would neither publish nor reward at least a third of them. Cobbled-together junk without any substance + usable information that isn't even worth a euro. Let alone five euros. But that doesn't necessarily mean your reviews.
This post has been translated automatically