Topic: Big prize for 1 participant in a signature campaign? - page 9. (Read 1039 times)
I want to know about the project that you said, can you provide a link to the project, so we can all know the truth? I personally have just heard this because what is meant by the OP is one participant, and if 5-10 participants I have personally seen it and prizes are distributed equally to the participants. if one participant I think that's impossible
for example: prize allocation for a campaign (signature) is around 2,000,000 tokens and if the project only has 1 participant in the campaign (signature) and when the project has been completed or not scammed, is it true that the participant will get the sum of all tokens (signatures)?
or maybe not at all, for other reasons?
I havent experienced this kind of scenario but mostly bounty manager or the team cuts the bounty allocation for certain campaign if they don't have needed participants. But it depends on the team or the bounty manager's decision if they will cut it or give the whole bounty allocation to that one lucky person. or maybe not at all, for other reasons?
Some projects in such scenarios peg their reward to a token worth of certain among. The person will only the highest possible reward in line with the bounty rule. I am on a campaign that claims that their payments is paid in number of stakes acquired with reward fixed on a stake as $0.1. That means if you happen to be the only one, you will just get reward for stakes you have acquired.
I doubt with such a project, that usually projects that have high expectations are always many participants, but if it is really a legitimate project and a good project manager at least a prize will be given to the participant. but the manager will not give everything, at least half of the total number of signature prizes.
As what have many says, first it is not possible to have only one participant on a signature campaign. However if this was so, i think it is still not possible for a single participant to solo the rewards allocated on signature vampaign, it will be decided by the manager to reduce the rewards to get by only single participant.
In my opinion, if something like this happens, the bounty manager will reduce payments to this participant and distribute tokens to other campaigns. I saw something like this when in the subscription campaign of one project there were only 5 participants.
In my opinion, if that happened on a campaign then the Manager will probably put some discretion on its announcement that if certain participants didn't reached their target for participants then the rewards will be deducted. Actually its quite unfair for that single if his the only participant then it will be reduced due to none joiners of that campaign. Well, the Manager must give him at least a bonus for being faitful 
I doubt these are some of the scenarios where bounty allocation is slashed due to project not wanting huge amount in the nads of few persons. In this case, the allocation will be slashed its not possible to have just a participant in a signature campaign.
Yeah is too much impossible signature campaign only one participant to join, if this scenario are beocme true the participant of that campaign is very bless he get quick millionaire.
I don't think that will happen and the signature will be stopped because it does not meet the requirements. If the signature is complete and only 1 participant, the prize will be deducted.
That is correct mate even the small prohect there have a lot of particiapant want to join amd apply, specially if the manager of the signature is reputable and popular.
~snip~ if the project only has 1 participant in the campaign (signature) ~snip~
It is impossible for a good project having a single participant only on their signature campaign. I doubt so much in this case, I strongly believe that it should be a scam project. Why only a single participant on the project? It is a big question. However, if it is true. I guess the bounty manager will cut the allocation. 
I don't think that will happen and the signature will be stopped because it does not meet the requirements. If the signature is complete and only 1 participant, the prize will be deducted.
for example: prize allocation for a campaign (signature) is around 2,000,000 tokens and if the project only has 1 participant in the campaign (signature) and when the project has been completed or not scammed, is it true that the participant will get the sum of all tokens (signatures)?
or maybe not at all, for other reasons?
I have never seen this happened and if it does, I believe the team will want to cut down the pool. If they do not do that, the fellow will dump the tokens and it will affect the price on an exchange, which perhaps they might not recover from.or maybe not at all, for other reasons?
You should also know that from reality, such cannot happen.
for example: prize allocation for a campaign (signature) is around 2,000,000 tokens and if the project only has 1 participant in the campaign (signature) and when the project has been completed or not scammed, is it true that the participant will get the sum of all tokens (signatures)?
or maybe not at all, for other reasons?
Yes that's true if the campaign based on the stakes allocation and there was a chance for that single participants to take all of the rewards (if the developer don't mind to change its decision to distribute all of the rewards to that participant too)or maybe not at all, for other reasons?
The only other reason if that participant can't get all of the rewards is the developer is changing the rules and put a cap to the how much maximum coin that can be received by any participants.
I have seen some campaigns that distributed a huge token to a few participants only.
in similar cases if participants are few then the allocation for the campaign is usually reduced, so participants do not get a token with a large amount. The manager will not let this happen.
Right, usually this is what happens. If there are only a few participants, if the project is successful, the price is good, usually if the distribution for the bounty has not been done then there will be a new policy, I don't know, maybe it's not fair, but the fact is so and "they" will argue that the developer and the team have the right to change the rules. Irony. 
I have never seen such case in the bounty campaigns, the bounty pool is divided to equal parts and it is distributed to all participants which can't be less than 50(some bounty managers put such rule on the first lines of general bounty campaign). The bounty earnings are the passive income, I don't like the idea of turning bounty hunting something can be done seriously. 1 participant can earn up to the allowed amounts of the token, in another situation he can dump the tokens right after the end of the bounty campaign.
It's not possible for a campaign to have just one participant not even scam projects can have one participant and if the amount of participants in a campaign is small the bounty manager's usually cut the allocation and add it to other campaigns.
There is a fixed token bounty pool for each campaign in the bounty. If bounty manager distributes the tokens from one part to another part it should be agreed with the marketing team before taking such a deal in my opinion.
If a bounty only has one participant, typically that bounty would close early and nothing given out... and project cancelled. Where it can work is when a bounty has a small number of participants (let's say a dozen or so), enough for the project to continue yet those participating get a decent number of coins.
Of course with situations like that it also means the project probably isn't so popular, so the odds of getting anything worth much is pretty rare.
Of course with situations like that it also means the project probably isn't so popular, so the odds of getting anything worth much is pretty rare.
It shouldn't be like that because 1 person can only do so much work for the company. It doesn't matter if he's the only one doing it he can only get them a given amount of views and that amount is priced accordingly.
Why should it be priced tenfold if he doesn't do a job of 10 people? It's not his achievement that nobody else wants to do it.
Why should it be priced tenfold if he doesn't do a job of 10 people? It's not his achievement that nobody else wants to do it.
It's not possible for a campaign to have just one participant not even scam projects can have one participant and if the amount of participants in a campaign is small the bounty manager's usually cut the allocation and add it to other campaigns.
Ask your manager, if there's a rule from their original post that says 'they have the rights and reserve to change rules or so' that will depend on his decision.
If he finds okay with sending all that reward to the one and only signature campaign participant then be grateful. But if it's his decision together with the devs to just give a portion then respect their decision.
If he finds okay with sending all that reward to the one and only signature campaign participant then be grateful. But if it's his decision together with the devs to just give a portion then respect their decision.
It is almost impossible to have a signature bounty with just one participant, especially if the project is valuable. But assuming this happened, the bounty manager (or the team) will decide to reduce the allocated tokens for signature bounty and pay this participant a lot less than the initial signature pool.
for example: prize allocation for a campaign (signature) is around 2,000,000 tokens and if the project only has 1 participant in the campaign (signature) and when the project has been completed or not scammed, is it true that the participant will get the sum of all tokens (signatures)?
or maybe not at all, for other reasons?
From my experience, the bounty manager can decide what is the best option and the final decision is up to his discretion. If the single bounty hunter is eligible to take all reward on the signature campaign then why not?or maybe not at all, for other reasons?
Jump to: