Topic: Are you happy with stakes payment method ? - page 3. (Read 1352 times)
What annoys me most are the campaigns that cut the pool after the end of the campaign, although there are no reasons for this when the funds have been raised successfully, so if some bounty manager was noticed in such campaigns I try not to participate in his campaigns anymore.
There are numerous ongoing bounty programs who are rewarding the bounty hunters by stakes model and sometimes bounty hunters are disappointed by the fact that ICO's don't meet the softcap thus the users do not get any benefit for their hard work or sometime they receive too little rewards for their hard work due to stakes systems, do we really need stakes system or the best thing will be provided a fixed amount of tokens for bounty (like $100 work of tokens per week or so)?
I think stakes method is quite enough as those team also wants their bounty participants to be their investors but this market situation hurt us all. This is the reason why most of those ICO has not able to pay their bounty participants as they had not able to reach the amount needed for their project. 
There is no other choice, we must obey the rules that have been made. I once followed the bounty for a fee of $ and calculated per post (signature campaign). That is quite profitable, even though it is subsequently accumulated with the number of tokens. But worth it. The actual stakes system is the same, it is only to facilitate the calculation, especially if the number of participants is very large.
It is high time to review the payment system. And even better to really punish for non-compliance with what is written in withpaper. In the sense of responsibility, the market is helpless
I strongly agree with giving prizes with the stake system. In my opinion, the system is very rewarding for our hard work because we can distinguish between junior members, members, full members, senior members, heroes, legendaries with different stake numbers. In my opinion, it is fair because to reach each of these rankings requires a struggle and the higher the ranking, the higher our efforts. Our problems are not paid when the project does not reach the softcap so we can make an agreement at the beginning because as a bounty campaign provider it should not be able to cancel the cooperation unilaterally. We have to analyze why the project didn't reach the softcap so we can correct the error. In the midst of improvement, we can stop temporarily at the bounty campaign. There are no problems without causes so we must be smart in looking for every cause that exists. Besides, if indeed we want to find a responsible ICO, we must be careful when choosing ICO.
The participant should do his own homework before joining any campaign. He should at least assess the potential of the project, if the project can really deliver their objectives. The team should have capability of realising their mission. Otherwise, it would be too easy to abandon their project if they will not achieve their target funds. And regarding the payment method, it's up to the project how they want to handle it. So if you are not happy with it, then, stay away. Simple.
I strongly agree with giving prizes with the stake system. In my opinion, the system is very rewarding for our hard work because we can distinguish between junior members, members, full members, senior members, heroes, legendaries with different stake numbers. In my opinion, it is fair because to reach each of these rankings requires a struggle and the higher the ranking, the higher our efforts. Our problems are not paid when the project does not reach the softcap so we can make an agreement at the beginning because as a bounty campaign provider it should not be able to cancel the cooperation unilaterally. We have to analyze why the project didn't reach the softcap so we can correct the error. In the midst of improvement, we can stop temporarily at the bounty campaign. There are no problems without causes so we must be smart in looking for every cause that exists. Besides, if indeed we want to find a responsible ICO, we must be careful when choosing ICO.
I kinda like the stakes system a lot of bounties use. I have seen bounties that pay out using models that pay out like 100usd worth of tokens at the end of the bounty or just award participators with some sure amount of tokens per week and according to the rank of a user.
I really find the stake system to be the most awarding of them all, but there are also dangers with it. Like when many high ranked users start to join the bounty and you with your low rank will just get "eaten up" by the way how final stakes are calculated.
I really find the stake system to be the most awarding of them all, but there are also dangers with it. Like when many high ranked users start to join the bounty and you with your low rank will just get "eaten up" by the way how final stakes are calculated.
Stake system is fair and if you make some calculations and join in the right time you can maximize your reward. We can also join the bounty when we see the progress of the fund raising to avoid to work for nothing.
I would say that at the moment there are too many ICOS that are initially hopeless and therefore should not participate in their bounty companies. Rare cases when the ICO is close to the hard cover and it still does not guarantee a normal payment to the hunters.
I am not opposed to the rates, so that these coins were paid on time, and after a while they were traded on the stock exchange, and their price would be acceptable for participants with even low rank.
There are numerous ongoing bounty programs who are rewarding the bounty hunters by stakes model and sometimes bounty hunters are disappointed by the fact that ICO's don't meet the softcap thus the users do not get any benefit for their hard work or sometime they receive too little rewards for their hard work due to stakes systems, do we really need stakes system or the best thing will be provided a fixed amount of tokens for bounty (like $100 work of tokens per week or so)?
i would really like a fixed amount. the stake system is ok, but it certainly has weak spots and is not always fair. participants in a bounty can thus better assess whether participation is worthwhile or not. that is why i would find a fixed amount better. 
Definitely we all bounty hunters will be happy if we received fix amount of tokens for performing weekly/monthly tasks. But in most of the bounties we have stakes system that we receive weekly. Even stake system is a fair system and the problem is participation should be limited so that one can receive a good reward for their efforts or time. We as a bounty hunters put our serious efforts to promote the ICOs but did not get the right reward in the end and sometime rejected for xyz reason. If we get fixed amount for the task we perform I would be more happy.
to choose those projects which pay fixed number of tokens is pointless. I've never seen such projects with good sums, there're always small rewards. Show me some which pay fixed number of tokens, but the amount is ok
Yes. It is good measurement for our activity for participating in campaigning. Participants get assurity that they are getting each week by checking spreadsheet, and at the end of campaign, able to see what total numbers of token any participant can get.
It would be good for the reward to be paid by the project tokens, but it was tied to $. Then it wouldn't be so offensive and work would be paid fairly. Some of the projects are doing.
The system stake is better than of fix amount because the results are much more, so I am very happy with this method. But if the fix amount is paid in bitcoin or etherum maybe everyone will prefer to use this method, considering after listed on the exchange the price of tokens is always far different from the ICO price.
I think it is not rewarding enough to be honest with you. Not that the payments are low or anything because if the payments became higher the number of coins mined will be higher as well and we can reach the last ones a lot easier but right now small coins that deal with masternodes and stakes all have the same problem that the transaction fee's are not a lot, so you need to make your money from the stakes and those stakes can't cover these bear markets. You have a coin like dash which gives you what 10% yearly at most? Well when you get 10% but drop 80% a year that makes no sense to keep staking such coin. Specter was the same, you get tiny amount of money from staking but the price went from 6 dollars to something like 20 cent last I checked, probably less. I mean there is nothing coins can do but it really doesn't worth caring about it.
As a member participating in the signature campaign with a very low rank, I prefer fixed amount that stakes model only works with members with good forum ranking, but I haven't been into a campaign that implements stakes model, but if it is good then it's worth to try it.
based on weekly stakes also working and best for low ranking member participating in signature campaign if you join the campaign that don't have too much particiapants, still have chance to get more tokens than fix amount, whatever which option is not important, don't become scam project at the end, if not your work is become useless
the stake system has been good and tried and i think it is quite good. i actually think it is quite fair so far and do not need another system.
There are numerous ongoing bounty programs who are rewarding the bounty hunters by stakes model and sometimes bounty hunters are disappointed by the fact that ICO's don't meet the softcap thus the users do not get any benefit for their hard work or sometime they receive too little rewards for their hard work due to stakes systems, do we really need stakes system or the best thing will be provided a fixed amount of tokens for bounty (like $100 work of tokens per week or so)?
As long as I get the reward from bounty programs and these are not scam programs, I will not be disappointed by the stakes models. Most bounty hunters disappointed when they don't get the reward or they get reward but it has no value on the market. As nowdays there are so many scam bounty that this is probably becoming factors of crash market.
I prefer that kind of model because I always get a bigger stakes because of my rank and this favor those who are involved in the signature campaign, especially if the campaign only has a few numbers of participants, I think it's a more popular payment method than fix amount of coins.
There are numerous ongoing bounty programs who are rewarding the bounty hunters by stakes model and sometimes bounty hunters are disappointed by the fact that ICO's don't meet the softcap thus the users do not get any benefit for their hard work or sometime they receive too little rewards for their hard work due to stakes systems, do we really need stakes system or the best thing will be provided a fixed amount of tokens for bounty (like $100 work of tokens per week or so)?
Yes I am happy about how the bounty campaigns manage their payment through stakes. Stakes do really provide an organized and fair payment for the bounty hunters, paying a fixed amount would be bad if the campaign is not successful.
Jump to: