Topic: campaign manager post counts behaviors; is this accepted? (Read 462 times)

Thank you very much for all your suggestions and contributions, anyway I have some of the managers responded here.
I am very happy seeing their feedback towards my complainant therefore, I have to lock this thread because I think seen many reason and suggestion leaving it open will results to more spam flooding in as reply.

I will buy the idea of increasing my post quality.

Thank you all.

Let me give you my take on that straight away. I think managers like that are being unnecessarily strict. When one even goes through these managers own post history too one will discover that these managers aren't fantastic posters themselves. I've observed a few of them. When they run out of managing campaigns and apply in other people's campaigns some of them don't even make it in the selection due to poor posting habit. That one has an opportunity of managing campaigns doesn't mean they're excellent posters. However OP, you ought to have dialogued this with the said manager of your vexation rather than make it an open discussion. Secret rebuke would do a better job than this open confrontation. Going forward, the one I hate with a passion is when CMs deny users their weekly pay because they missed the maximum weekly post count with a whisker, sometimes with just a post or two out of the 25 or so max. That's pure wickedness. Why not penalize the user than deny them pay completely. This is why pay per post is better.

In this case, posting making most at least have a 50% quality out of the aggregate of your weekly post quota. This issues remind me that some people doesn't make a quality post when they are in signature campaign and every manager have its ethics or rules and regulations that control it's campaign, so during calculation of quality or qualify Post that merits payment in that campaign some irrelevant post or Post's that lacks qualities can be nullify by the manager.

If a manager remove participants in a campaign without notification that means during the rules that bind that signature campaign before started to accept participants, it has being enshrined in the campaign rules, and removal of participants in campaign it's detriment of the campaign manager because what every managers needs is good promotion in any campaign they manage.

But it's unethical from my perception not to at least give one time warning before removal of someone from a campaign, because warning someone will help a participants for immediate correction, and the warning can take place through a pm or the spreadsheet and when it persist you can remove the participants without notification.

I'm sure the OP has also read the description the manager added to the spreadsheet. It seems that what the OP is concerned about is why the quality of the posts he makes is not satisfying the standards of the campaign manager. while based on the experience of the campaign that he had, the quality of the post he had was considered to have met the requirements.

OP just needs to get used to the habits of the manager. and indeed can not equate one manager with another manager. when the OP improves the post quality as expected by the manager, I'm sure all the problems are solved.

I would say he would have been lucky to be still in the campaign with somewhat low quality posts and yet complaining with the manager. How strange is that from the OP. If he does not like the judgement from the manager, he has always chance to move on to the other campaign.

Since he is still in the campaign, he should improve his post quality and also make 7-8 extra posts, in case few of his posts does not meet the expectation, he still have enough posts to be paid.

You have the ability to communicate. If your campaign manager doesn't reach out to you first, or if you're unsure about why something happened, ask them - it'll be a much better use of your time than making threads complaining about it.

From a quick look at your post history, I don't think your campaign manager is being unreasonable in rejecting that number of posts. A lot of your posts are on spam megathreads with poor English, which results in very very little actual contribution.

To make it easier, make it a habit to first read the rules made by the campaign manager, whether the conditions requested are in accordance with our posting habits. Sometimes the post you make does not meet one of the requirements requested or it could be because the quality of the post does not match the desired specifications. If after reading it and you think it doesn't make sense then leave the campaign, it's the only way you won't be kicked out of the campaign.

What has to be understood is that campaign managers never ask us to join their campaigns and instead it is us who consciously sign up for their campaigns. Sometimes it's too difficult for us to accept other people's decisions, but on the other hand we don't try to follow their rules.

Grow a thick skin. Can’t decide if you are genuinely offended by this or just taking advantage of the ongoing drama on this board.
Lol I think we all have a good idea who you are referring to. Not the smartest thing to do btw. As someone who’s been promoting a signature campaign for the same manager as you for over eight weeks. I can boldly say Royse777 likes to maintain a certain level of quality for his campaigns and he demands the best of his participants. He gives feedback on spreedsheet so you know what area to improve. I don’t know why you thought it was a good idea to create a thread about this, you could have aired your feelings in the telegram group as instructed by Royse777

I don't know why this topic necessary to create due you are in @Royse777 Bounty Manager Campaign, every time when weekly signature campaign ended he said about any one or participant have complaint about their post not enough or not count fell free to discuss on signature campaign thread or you can ask him at Bounty Telegram Group.

Actually, @Royse777 has different rule with other campaign Bounty Manager, he not allowed make post on altcoin board, maximum 5 local post and have update time or UTC, each manager not has the same UTC rule and better you can ask to @Royse777 about why your post not qualify.

---

I think has ideas how to make it easy about count post or not check other participants and see abut all their post qualify, you can follow about their topic discussing.

If this thread was created just because the OP was talking about @Royse777, then OP shouldn't send me Telegram DM or forum PM. Manager has warned, but OP can discuss it in telegram group or campaign thread.


After all, OP could immediately notice the note on why @Royse777 didn't count some of his posts if the OP had checked the Spreadsheet.

First of all, you are doing a good job if you are posting more than the campaign minimum requirements. This means that you are not one of those who only post for campaign and stick to the minimum.  I did not see your posts but if they are as per the campaign requirements, then you may PM the manager and ask him the reason for the rejection of posts.

By the way, the managers are the better judge and in most cases, you (the participants) are doing some mistakes which you yourself do not know  

I agree with your assessment 100%.  There used to be a time when I'd regularly exceed the maximum number of posts allowed for whatever campaign I was in, and although I think I did mention that fact in the context of defending myself against the accusation of being a campaign spammer, I don't think I've ever cared if a manager rejected any of the posts I made.

Even in Chipmixer I usually have at least one or two posts each week that didn't make the cut for whatever reason, but I always assume the thread got moved to a section that Chipmixer doesn't pay for posts in.  In any case I know I'm fortunate so I don't complain about petty issues like that.

And I mean, come on.  There are so many signature campaign participants dropping the most generic, low-effort crap imaginable that it's a very good thing if the campaign manager is refusing to pay because of quality issues.  There are plenty of campaign and bounty managers who just don't give a shit and probably don't review anyone's post in detail, if at all.

Why don't PM your manager or ask him in campaign thread what kept him from counting some of your posts and the posts of other participants?

I think I know which manager you're talking about, but you may not feel comfortable mentioning his name in your thread. Is this true about Royse777 and its campaign management?

I checked the spreadsheet of the campaign you're promoting, and sure enough Royse777 didn't count many of its participants' posts because they didn't qualify ^{[Post Denied]} based on the manager's own interpretation. But if you've tried to comply with all term & conditions campaign, then it's a good idea to ask him why. But if you are unable to comply with the rules and whatever makes you unhappy, then leave the campaign and look for another campaign.

Even if its additional 20 posts if those posts are redundant and not within the topic then these posts will be deleted and the manager will not qualify those posts.



Don't compare managers they have different rules that they implement, as a participant, you should be the one to adapt to the rules and what is required of you by the managers, remember you apply here, and by applying you agreed to follow what managers laid out in the campaign.


I assume that the manager doesn't want to embarrass the participant and just waits for the booted participant to just ask him the reason why he is booted out.


I don't think there are managers who act like that, you're having this feeling because in the first place you failed to communicate with that manager, so you will be enlightened, don't assume unless you confirmed it.

When you post because you like to post and not because it is a job, it will not make any difference to you whether one or several posts are not counted. Consider what you post as a bonus to learn more.

If the manager does not pay for many of your posts without a convincing reason, contact him and ask him about the reason. Sometimes you may not read campaign rules like posting in in local boards, altcoin, Gambling or the campaign manager sees that most of his campaign members post in a particular board (Bitcoin Discussion,Economics) so he rejects them, regardless of their quality.

If this does not work, then he withdraws from the campaign and submits your objection here. IF MANY repeated, he may be given a negative trust that makes it difficult for him to run future campaigns.

You can definitely tell who is here for a job and who is here posting because they are interested in a topic. There are multiple users who do the exact number of posts required and they get mad as hell if they don't get paid because 1 doesn't meet quality standards or a post was deleted.

Regardless, the managers decision is final and users need to realize that.

When it doubt ask, or forever hold your grudge, the managers already laid out the rules when they start the campaign, your duty as a part of the campaign is to check that you are within that rules if you think that you have followed the rules and you are taken out of the campaign then you have the right to know and the bounty manager will give it to you if you ask him, by not naming the manager you put some of the managers questioning their reputation so to relieve the other managers better name the manager if you have the guts to do it.

The rules are the rules. If there is a rule that allows them to do so, and you agreed to the terms before joining, you cannot object.

The thing that can be objected to is if the campaign manager writes comments about the quality of your posts or asks you to develop them because I think he is asking you to improve the quality of spam, otherwise why did he appoint you in the first place if your posts are good or at least it is better to write such tips in private.

In general, you can contact the owner and explain to him the behavior of the campaign manager. If your point of view is correct, they may change the campaign manager.

I can see from your campaign spreadsheet, the campaign manager denied 5 posts reducing hour eligible post count to 23. From your words, I can sense you must be really hurt by this. I checked your post for that week and could easily find the posts that didn’t meet signature requirements. The campaign rules are clear, only 10 posts in gambling board were counted as eligible, your posts in off-topic weren’t counted and the others that didn’t meet 150 characters length or wasn’t considered constructive was denied as well. You can do the review again yourself and be the judge.

If I understand correctly, you are participating in a pay-per-post campaign, which means that even though some of your posts were rejected, you were still compensated for the remaining ones. I wouldn't be upset about that, as it is typical for a manager to have stricter rules in such a campaign.


Personally, I wouldn't mind if managers paid more attention to the quality of their participants' posts, particularly in the Gambling section, where there seems to be a lot of spam. (I want to make it clear that I haven't checked your posts, and I'm not saying they were spam.)


I recall having a similar discussion a few years ago when I was just starting my journey in this community. I was inexperienced and naive (in terms of this forum) and the manager's actions offended and hurt me emotionally. But over time, you learn to develop a thicker skin and not be affected by such things as much. Looking back, today I would say that everyone has the right to hold their own opinion, and even if it differs from yours, it's important to learn to respect it. The only thing within your control is your own actions, and working on bettering yourself and proving them wrong, as I have done, is the best course of action. As others have pointed out already, this is their party, they make the rules. Either you dance to their tune or you can always leave the dance floor.