Topic: Bounties with limitations pays higher rewards - page 2. (Read 1716 times)
I strongly agree with this idea, because at least a baounty hunter pays one of them because of the many participants who register, and it's not effective in my opinion
Maybe because the bounty that locks a limited participants wants to make sure that the bounty hunters who promote the project will be benefited well as they will work harder for the promoting they do so i must choose project that locks a limited and high allocation in bounty campaigns.
If there is capped on participants yes i can say you can get a better rewards but allocation is the most important for higher bounty
RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS
The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
It really will result in good rewards I remember participating in one campaign, where there is no limit of participants and this is a signature campaign and I am already with a legendary account, I end up getting $50 worth of their token, there is no spreadsheet but the number of participants is over 300 bounty manager should really limit the participants.
This is very true. In fact I love any Bounty that actually have max number of people that can join a particular campaign. This way each participants is sure to earn a good amount of reward. For example bountyhive, bounties on bountyhive as restrictions on the number of people that can join and that's makes every participant to be adequately rewarded. Too many crowd in a campaign only leads to people earning peanuts.
I met such restrictions, but such companies still do not gain this number.
Be careful fraudsters can use this method too.
Be careful fraudsters can use this method too.
I believe that the limitations of which are written above affect payments, but not always effectively. For me, however, there remains such a formula: the maximum pool for payments + a minimum of participants. In this case, you can get the maximum reward, well, if only admins want to pay so much. Last time, if the earnings are really big, they take it and cut it down. In my practice, there have already been several such bounty. When asked why? Answer - you have earned too much, it should not be so. So only luck can help in this matter.
Yes this is so true and it means there won't be too much dumpers too since the participants are limited but many bounties don't care about reducing participants I think that's why most projects coins lose value too quick
It is relative but when comparing to all paying bounties it is pays more, at least there won't be need for having worked for some months with your junior or memeber rank for some months all of a sudden a lot of persons with the hero or legendary memeber rank will participate for two weeks and pack all the stakes and token.
RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS
The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
I agree on this restriction and i feel its a will give a better benefits on every bounty hunter but in order for the project to get known in the public that there should be no limitation on participants. More participants in bounty is more the project get known in public and more investors to come.
During my involvement in bounties, I saw - / + 40% of projects implementing participant restrictions in each campaign. Programs like this are good to implement to maximize gifts and other things we don't want. I hope, programs like this can be 100%.
That mostly happens, it is bacause they are calculating their allocation carefully according to certain amount of participants to enjoy their reward, but no matter how high the reward is, if the value of the coin or token is very low then its not really a high reward.
I think the bounty restrictions and limitations only intended for enough allocation to be given to participants, not the amount that's got to be a higer rewards. Even less participants still it can have also lesa rewards if the rewards tokens has a low value amount.
RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS
The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
Yes. This is a good idea for bounty participants. within that limit, people will be more fair and will definitely receive higher value rewards. However, it is necessary to consider the degree of success in promoting the news of the project. Having more participants to promote and market the project (including many campaigns) will be more effective than specified by quantity.The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
You forget that the main goal of bounty campaigns is to advertise the project and attract new investors, not to distribute rewards for stupid reposts. The quantity passing in quality does not always work; does not mean that 1000 participants with 10000 subscribers are better than 10000 participants with 1000 subscribers (though you should not forget that more than a half of subscribers are the same bots). The result on social networks is elementary tracked and checked by transitions.
RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS
The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
Its correct but most of the bounties right now don't do that. I think its good for all the bounty hunters hen they limit the participants and its good for the project also if they increase the quality of work of the participants. It all depends on the manager on how to check the work carefully.
The of bounty participants has dropped since they are becoming much less profitable especially as the bitcoin market has not recovered. This means bounties will not have many limitations otherwise less people will join
RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN = HIGHER PAYOUTS
The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
Yes. This is a good idea for bounty participants. within that limit, people will be more fair and will definitely receive higher value rewards. However, it is necessary to consider the degree of success in promoting the news of the project. Having more participants to promote and market the project (including many campaigns) will be more effective than specified by quantity.The limitations can be done in two ways:
1)Quantative — when a max number of participants is set and no one is allowed to join after that.
Example: Max 1000 entrants in a facebook campaign
2)Qualitative — when the requirements are raised up by the bounty managers.
Example: Minimum 500 followers to participate in an article/blogging campaign.
In my opinion, limiting the number of participants is a good idea to protect bounty hunters, you can take months of finishing work to get only a few dollars due to the large number of participants. But perhaps this limits the promotion of the project, the team will want more and more participants to disseminate their products.
I think most of the bounty campaigns have limitations. From the maximum tokens for the bounty campaign to the maximum number of participants to participate in each campaign.
I think most of these campaigns are more strict and sometimes, they need KYC from the bounty participants. I'm not joining in bounty campaigns anymore but I think campaigns with limits are better for me.
I think most of these campaigns are more strict and sometimes, they need KYC from the bounty participants. I'm not joining in bounty campaigns anymore but I think campaigns with limits are better for me.
It is okay that participation limitation will increase stake allocation and rewards. But I do wonder that if a project itself is not good or do not have practical goals, then it is worthless to acquire a large amount of tokens. I will be better off getting a small amount of worthy and good tokens. So it means we must pick a good project for bounty programme.
I never get why people who go for bounties keep complaining after one thing or another. Give them limits to protect the supply and they complain. Tell them it is unlimited and they complain that there are too much supply and say devs should burn the tokens.
Basically bounty hunters are a bad bunch of people just looking to make money,,, they actually could not care less about the project.
Get your tokens, use them, try them. Maybe you can be surprised how it helps the price.
Jump to: