not really, not all of them is bad how can you generalize them all.
even some projects sometimes perform procedures quickly, I mean making payments, calculating weekly stake, and other things related to the distribution process.
it's about the individual not about the project, about behavior.
Topic: Bounties managed by team themselves - page 4. (Read 864 times)
all depends on the project management team, if the project management team has behaved strangely, then the bounty manager also cannot do anything, because the job of a bounty manager is to manage and pay from the bounty hunter.
Normally I am quite supportive of the bounty managers. But at the same time, they can't just say that it is all the fault of the project team. The responsibility of the bounty manager is not just limited to allocating the stakes and then distributing the bounty. He also needs to make sure that the project team is keeping with their promise on the bounty payment and development.
The bounty manager is indeed very instrumental in a project, because the manager does the calculation and pays the bounty hunter wages, but it all depends on the ICO management, if the ICO / IEO manager is not clear then the bounty manager cannot do anything, so look for a manager who is honest and firm in managing his bounty.
There are some advantage as well as disadvantages to it. First you can be sure that the team will keep their word as breaking the promise means they lose the trust of the investors even if it is bounty.
On the flip side they might delay the release of token .
they can also delay payment through BTT managers. I think that when a project team uses their person bounty managers for a bounty campaign, it’s more convenient for bounty hunters.On the flip side they might delay the release of token .
Because team members know more info.
I prefer participate in Bounty campaigns hold by known Bounty Managers. They have a huge experience in holding Bounties, so they will likely to host a campaign smoothly.
There are some advantage as well as disadvantages to it. First you can be sure that the team will keep their word as breaking the promise means they lose the trust of the investors even if it is bounty.
On the flip side they might delay the release of token .
On the flip side they might delay the release of token .
Question is that is it safe? Bounties managed by team member is risky since you don't know what are the actual intent of the project owners. They usually hold all the power to change the rules or the token allocation themselves to turn to their favour. There have been many cases in the past where they have put wierd conditions in order to get tokens.
Not safe actually. But the hunters dont have much choice if the campaign handled by the team. OP is right, some are unfair one when dealing with rewards like they can decrease it on their own. If only we can find a campaign manager like in btc paid that handle altcoins too. I think yahoo did, but he is not handling anymore altcoins. 
Well, I think there are some really successful projects whose bounty managers come from themselves. however, this returned to the confidence of his team. it's just that, the bounty manager can also be an important point to attract participants because there are some bounty managers who are quite proficient in doing their jobs. however, the team is still invaluable in terms of bounty management, so, I think if the choice is the bounty manager of the project team, or the experienced bounty manager, of course, the choice is the experienced one.
Question is that is it safe? Bounties managed by team member is risky since you don't know what are the actual intent of the project owners. They usually hold all the power to change the rules or the token allocation themselves to turn to their favour. There have been many cases in the past where they have put wierd conditions in order to get tokens. Many participants don't like such changes so it is recommended to join third party managers.
Now they might have been successful but yeah since you don't know what they are gonna do it is recommended to stay away from them.
Well, I think there are some really successful projects whose bounty managers come from themselves. however, this returned to the confidence of his team. it's just that, the bounty manager can also be an important point to attract participants because there are some bounty managers who are quite proficient in doing their jobs. however, the team is still invaluable in terms of bounty management, so, I think if the choice is the bounty manager of the project team, or the experienced bounty manager, of course, the choice is the experienced one.
all depends on the project management team, if the project management team has behaved strangely, then the bounty manager also cannot do anything, because the job of a bounty manager is to manage and pay from the bounty hunter.
Even they don't have the right to pay bounty hunters. The bounty manager job is to manage the campaign in the best way, and then the bounty manager will send the work results to the project and the project will make payment. It all depends on the project and the bounty manager is just a bounty hunter
all depends on the project management team, if the project management team has behaved strangely, then the bounty manager also cannot do anything, because the job of a bounty manager is to manage and pay from the bounty hunter.
Most of the bounty that is managed by its team itself have controlled distribution or most of the time the team will decide to buy your token at a lower price in an OTC manner before it will get listed, the advantages are it avoids dumping of bounty token and bounty hunters learn to hold for a better price in the future.
It's not all of projects were implementing the buy back method. i think that you must aware about this if even the bounty has managed by the bounty service and the team was still controlling the distribution. What you have been saying didn't implemented by a lot of bounties.
1. They have all the freedom of doing any how with your rewards
2. They can change certain rules that aren't reasonable, just because it's their project and they are handling the distribution they are free to do some bad things
3. Bounty Managers are very very important, you can get them nailed for not facing the team to force them to do distribution but you can't fight the team yourself
All your points are leading to interpreted as possible misuse/misbehave than what they promise by the times of beginning of bounty program. It seems if we want to be staying under safer hands then it must be possible only when we choose bounties which are managed by highly reputed managers of this forum. Otherwise, getting big disappointment at the end of bounties may become inevitable.2. They can change certain rules that aren't reasonable, just because it's their project and they are handling the distribution they are free to do some bad things
3. Bounty Managers are very very important, you can get them nailed for not facing the team to force them to do distribution but you can't fight the team yourself
I guess we need to add another filter in our due diligence procedures in order to ensure highly secured environment for bounty hunting; that would be not preferring to work on the campaigns which are being managed by themselves. Thanks for enlightening us regarding this, definitely helpful to me and to this community as well.
I'm not here to discourage you about bounty campaigns that are managed by the project team themselves, I'm here to tell you that you need to be extremely cautious, I've noticed that team managing campaigns themselves is not good
---snip
I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees things this way, or am I?
However, we cannot generalize that the bounty campaign handled by the dev team itself always ends up being a scam or disappointing. From the important points discussed by the OP, the risk could be greater because they are free to change the rules and allocations arbitrarily without regard to justice for bounty hunters. But what else can we do? bounty campaigns handled by external managers also don't necessarily guarantee that we will get a fair reward, it's all back to the dev team's decision.---snip
I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees things this way, or am I?
Escrow is one solution to uphold justice, so this can be considered as well.
I'm not here to discourage you about bounty campaigns that are managed by the project team themselves, I'm here to tell you that you need to be extremely cautious, I've noticed that team managing campaigns themselves is not good
---snip
I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees things this way, or am I?
However, we cannot generalize that the bounty campaign handled by the dev team itself always ends up being a scam or disappointing. From the important points discussed by the OP, the risk could be greater because they are free to change the rules and allocations arbitrarily without regard to justice for bounty hunters. But what else can we do? bounty campaigns handled by external managers also don't necessarily guarantee that we will get a fair reward, it's all back to the dev team's decision.---snip
I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees things this way, or am I?
Escrow is one solution to uphold justice, so this can be considered as well.
I haven't observed this. And yes, bounty mangers are very important. But it all depends on the kind of bounty manager. If the bounty manager isn’t persuasive enough to change bounty protocols or rules in the interest of both the hunters and project, things might not go so well. There are few bounty managers who are really doing well being bounty managers. These are the ones that make much difference.
Regardless, it is important to always do your due diligence before participating in any project.
Regardless, it is important to always do your due diligence before participating in any project.
Even if the project got bounty manager still they can't force the bounty team to pay the rewards for participants if they are refusing to do.Bounty manager is also need to be an important factor that everyone should consider but don't take it for granted, do your own research on the team as well.
but reputable bounty manager would make any campaigns run smoother by saving the bounty pools to escrow or to bounty manager itself, i have seen other managers to do that and most of them are paying and successful both the ieo and bounty events, but it doesnt mean you should rely on that. like you said, research for the teams behind the project is mandatoryMy opinion regarding about bounty programs if you are a participant - don't expect you will get the reward on time and with their target price.
Even reputable BMs are being screwed by these projects, unless they will give the allotted tokens to a particular escrow before the campaign begins.
Either way, the risk is still there, unless you join a btc paying campaign. That I can say has high chance of getting paid.
Although the situation you are talking about is something we do not encounter very often today, I think that some regulations should be introduced by the forum management for such campaigns. First of all, I think that various measures should be taken such as limited regulation of the campaign conditions after the start of the campaign, provided that the project and the campaign managers have no connection. Unfortunately, since there are no such rules or regulations in the system of today, the project team has the control they desire under all circumstances and the campaign participants can experience victimization for this reason.
what often happens is usually the rules that change in the middle of the bounty in progress. usually becomes mandatory kyc, or backward distribution of tokens.
But you need to understand that in participating a campaign the team has the right to change all the rules of the bounty at any moment given that they have noticed something fishy or in need of something.Most of the time this is drive by the anomaly in the spreadsheet such as having an alternative account of a user, I do believe the campaign manager also have the right to suggest it to the team.
What's worse in my opinion is when at the beginning they (the team) made a large exchange list such as binance, or etherdelta, but in the end it was listed on exchangers with minimal liquidity. it is a disappointing thing in my opinion because it does not match at the beginning, but changes occur when we are already in.
That was just the target, If it happens then good if not then try to other. Every project dreamed of being listed on an exchange that has a huge reputation in the community to gain confidence in the market. 
Bounty managers are the only thing standing in between hunters and project team, it's bounty managers job to make sure they bounty hunters get paid for their work but sometimes when the team starts behaving weird there is nothing the bounty manager can do about it.
Bounty managers are also helpless sometimes. If the BMs don't escrow the funds, there is nothing much they (BMs) can do to aid the distribution of rewards at the end of the bounty. I have participated in various bounties managed by BMs but the distributions were done by the project teams. Some distributed the rewards while others didn't. Some that even distributed gave strict conditions while some wouldn't allow hunters to withdraw to their private wallet. All the time BMs were helpless in those scenarios. Jump to: