Facts review Requester says that there is more than 50 views at the time of submission but brings no proof to back that. Jurors need to base their vote upon evidence and I see none here thus leading to a submission rejection.

Response What do you mean by the following: insufficient views, 2 likes, don't spam, don't scam. concerning the views : it has 71 views as at the time of this response(that is more than the 50 required) concerning likes : there are no rules on how much likes is needed for article, the 5 retweets or likes only applies to twitter concerning spammy and scammy : the post is a continuation of my exposition of the kleros ecosystem,when did it become wrong to info people where they can buy PNK tokens. Would kleros itself advertising where to buy PNK tokens be scam. concerning MXC and Hoo.com : you can find them listed here ( https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/kleros#markets) as some places to buy PNK tokens. A juror ought only to challenge a submission if it goes against the laid down rules as stated in the listing policies and not after his own interpretations

Challenge Justification The post has insufficient interactions and no proof of sufficient views. At the time I the challenger reviewed, it has 2 likes. Review the attachment or archive: https://archive.is/imB31 I also advice requester to put efforts for more creative and impactful content. February storytelling had a guideline "don't spam, don't scam." If this rule is still implied, saying "buy PNK" and promoting scammy exchanges MXC and Hoo is on the edge of being scammy and spammy content.