matthew.davis

Good point, Lily. @steemcleaners, we would appreciate if you note that we have a lot of reports as part of our content. Makes no sense @cheetah commenting our posts because of that. We have discussed this

Yes @shanks25, maybe in three weeks this scenario will change a bit.

Hi @steemcleaners / @cheetah, We are experimenting some issues with this template and the MarkDown editor and that's why we are missing part of the content of the post. Note that we are tagging (with this

Hi @steemcleaners / @cheetah, We are experimenting some issues with this template and the MarkDown editor and that's why we are missing part of the content of the post. Note that we are tagging (with this

No worries Ali, That's why they suggested us to add the note: [ Note for @steemcleaners / @cheetah ] The agreement of our Team: The following authors decided to create a Team in order to collaborate and

Thanks @marcohernandez98 for your vote and your comment. Gracias !

[ Note for @steemcleaners / @cheetah ] The agreement of our Team: The following authors decided to create a Team in order to collaborate and share formats and content in our posts. Any copy of content

Hi @marcelsantos, We tried a lot of them and this one really works: SwagBucks Everybody has positive reviews about SwagBucks

Hi @phuzion7, Thank you for your interest. Regarding the "Steem", in the footer of this post you can find this: Rank: 34 Price: $3.53 Volume(24h): $28,212,000 Market capital: $871,324,146 Available

Hi @patrice, Yes, this a false positive. We are working together and there is no kind of plagiarism here. I can confirm it. We already clarified this issue here:

Hello @steemcleaners / @cheetah, We are reporting this false positive. The bot (@cheetah) should improve his algorithm: On the content, we are pointing to the original sources ("Source + Source")

Hi. Are you comment/asking about any specific cryptocurrency?

STOP