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.
Most campaign used the stake system model because it can be considered as the best method. High rank will get a better states than low rank. Basically just like what has already did by BCT to put restriction just like merit system. 
Topic: Are you happy with stakes payment method ? - page 4. (Read 1352 times)
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.
Stakes for me is just a mathematical model to simplify calculations. Because in a bounty it involves several controls that affect the amount of reward we get, including the number of participants and allocations from each campaign. In certain campaigns, rank, quantity and quality of our "work" are also taken into account. Just be patient, enjoy the process. If you want to get big rewards, you have to read and analyze better.
Yes, why not? I like the bounty campaigns with the stake system, they are much better than the fixed pay campaigns
Stake system of reward have been abused and used as an avenue of robing bounty hunters their fortune, having a fixed payment in ETH OR BTC is an excellent idea God bless you.
I think that we will not see such a system, very few people will want to pay ETH or BTC. So stay as it is. maybe in the past 2016 I like the payment system like that because at that time the bounty hunters were very few, different from today. Apart from that reason, there are also many gift programs that only pay stake, they don't pay their tokens
That is clear that earlier it was much easier to make money, there were a maximum of 200 people in the social networks and now 1000 is the minimum. But all the same, and now you can certainly earn.
For some bounties you really spend a lot of time. But we can not earn enough money because he can not get enough investment or scam. A solution to this problem is necessary
maybe in the past 2016 I like the payment system like that because at that time the bounty hunters were very few, different from today. Apart from that reason, there are also many gift programs that only pay stake, they don't pay their tokens
I am disappointed on bounties this year. It seems that it is so hard for them to let go of the ALLOCATED coins for bounties. It takes a very long time to distribute and KYC is taking a lot more time than expected. Also, ICO's are finding ways to delay everything and it makes bounty hunter frustrated. Only 10% of bounties I joined were paying and its a very painful experience to work for months without getting paid. Hopefully the scam ICO's will stop as soon as possible.
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 the stakes system is really the best measurement of activity, but it has to be for a fixed amount of tokens in $ and not the usual dependent on softcap that is usually employed.
We bounty hunters are employed to work, and regardless of whatever happens, we should be paid for work well done.
There need to be a regulation about this. Because time spent cannot be recovered, but money can be recovered, bounty hunters deserves more.
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)?
People complain only when they think they are not getting what they deserve, but the stakes system has some advantages, one of those is that if the ico you are promoting does not have many participants but it reaches its soft cap then you are going to receive an incredible amount of tokens and you could make in a single campaign more money than what you could have made in many more campaigns.
I will have to agree that bounties with fixed amount of rewards are the most attractive. This is because for every task completed, you see the corresponding amount of rewards attached and as such, there is extra motivation to complete your task in time. The stakes system comes with a lot of complexities and most times, a lot of shortchanging of hunters by Bounty managers or Project developers. This leads to complains and sometimes dissatisfaction from hunters. I strongly suggest that this system be eradicated and a more sincere and transparent system implemented.
I think the betting system would be good. Even better would be to have it designed for each range. Then the bounty hunters were not in vain and not in vain.
There is not many things to choose from, so I am happy with the one existing. Better of course, if they will pay in Ethereum.
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)?
Stake or no stake, if a bounty payment will be low, it will surely be low. My take is that the project team should take more accomodating decisions on bounty allocation, especially when they see that bounty participants are getting too much. They should also find a way to limit the number of tokens that can be accumulated by a single hunter. That's my take Stake system of reward have been abused and used as an avenue of robing bounty hunters their fortune, having a fixed payment in ETH OR BTC is an excellent idea God bless you.
I do not agree with you here because the stakes system have been the best method and techniques deployed by Bounty Managers in quantifying what hunters will receive at the end of the campaign. Most times it is better to get a good number of stakes so that you will earn good number of tokens from the Bounty Campaign. I still prefer stakes because even with fixed ETH and BTC Payment system, Bounty managers still make use of stakes before awarding ETH or BTC at the end of the Bounty Campaign. Stakes just make Bounty participants to work hard in creating more awareness about the campaign they Participated in. 
I'm absolutely happy with it, just a craps that thinks the system is unfair. After that, the amount of payment depends on how many participants participated in the campaign, the more it, it will be smaller for everyone and vice versa.
Stake system of reward have been abused and used as an avenue of robing bounty hunters their fortune, having a fixed payment in ETH OR BTC is an excellent idea God bless you.
It all depends on the number of people that get involved in the campaign, if those that do it are not much then I prefer staking method but if they are many then a fixed number of rewards is better than staking which does not have certainty of the amount of tokens.
Honestly I'm not , When it hasn't been specified that how much tokens I'm going to get it could be worthless , I have some bad experiences from staky tokens that I'm not eager to repeat them again .
Jump to: