[Talanes]

Emphasizing how well he paid you only makes you more suspect as a source for everyone who is not you. I mean, the first accusation that gets thrown about in internet arguments is that the other side is a shill. Because we don't trust people to give honest public assessments about the people who pay them.

[daniel-cussen]

I guess if he paid me and I speak up on his behalf that makes me a shill according to your definition. I don't agree. He didn't pay me to defend him in any circumstances, I never met him, never communicated with him. Anonymity. There's significance in him paying me more than what he strictly had to, my point is it was highly unmotivated, it was like a taxpayer paying excess taxes.

EDIT: It's not like a bribe, he didn't pay me an outrageous amount. I earned it then, in full. It was just unusual because he wasn't trying to minimize what I got from working for him. And I spoke to another employee there who loved the place and the top thing on her mind was beyond its basic virtue, it was a place that didn't require a college degree to get paid decently. Go figure, the wage a place pays, without you having to play mind games and negotiation tactics day in and day out, matters. Wages drive employee satisfaction, who would have thought.

[Talanes]

I mentioned "shills" not to call you one, but to emphasize how counter-productive "This person gave me money" is as a measure of character. It meant a lot to you, obviously, but bringing it up only serves to reduce your credibility. Doing so repeatedly and with greater emphasis is not doing you any favors.

[TomSwirly]

"Someone gave me money to work" is NOT a proof of character, as has been explained to you repeatedly.