Campaign managers should be accountable for the post quality of these wearing their signature. As per my understanding a certainly *decent* amount of quality is needed in each post to qualify for a payment in signature campaigns.
Shall the manager check each post before payment ? And shall the manager warn/ban these who are not compliant a certain quality (aka Spammers) ?
The answer is Yes. Maybe moderators should warn managers and ban campaigns from the forum if these allow spam instead of removing signature campaigns. Personally I believe these are useful means of advertisement and a powerful tool, the focus should be in preventing quality deviations just for the sake of getting paid.
Topic: Chances of signature campigns being removed from this forum (Read 774 times)
When I first came here, I didn't know anything about signature campaigns, forum was the place to find people interested about services and participating in Ponzis, waiting for reputable members to launch their legitimate investment services to invest and earn.
Signature campaigns used to pay $20 to the highest rank, having $5 as the lowest life beggars in full member rank was the best thing that could happen to beggars like me.
If I was cloud mining, all the talk was about cloud mining.
Do you guys even use any services and then talk about them?
Why should we have families with 10 accounts for every family member? I stopped my brother from posting here, quit being a lowlife beggar and do the same.
Don't make me to beg theymos to give me 50% of sMerits and then I'd merit any of your posts if you had no signature for a week.
I could even ask him to give me 5000 sMerits with me selling them for $0.1 per merit to only high quality posts and collect that money to reward the top merited member every month.
Signature campaigns used to pay $20 to the highest rank, having $5 as the lowest life beggars in full member rank was the best thing that could happen to beggars like me.
If I was cloud mining, all the talk was about cloud mining.
Do you guys even use any services and then talk about them?
Why should we have families with 10 accounts for every family member? I stopped my brother from posting here, quit being a lowlife beggar and do the same.
Don't make me to beg theymos to give me 50% of sMerits and then I'd merit any of your posts if you had no signature for a week.
I could even ask him to give me 5000 sMerits with me selling them for $0.1 per merit to only high quality posts and collect that money to reward the top merited member every month.
Signature campaign is one of the best way to advertise or promote ICO or any project in crypto world, that is why i do not think this method will be removed in this forum. About merit system if all the campaign manager make it a basis i think many shit poster will not be able to join in the campaign.
Correct, signature campaign was used by many ICO developer to promote their coin specially if trusted or higher ranked member of this forum wear the signature of their project it has a big impact to many investors because it also one of the basis for good ICO. Yes, now merit system was included in selecting participants in signature campaign that is why it is a real nightmare for the spammers.
Correct, I think I may have seen a campaign by Yahoo62278 where there was a bonus for people with a certain level of merit.
It may even become a requirement by applicants in the future,
where if you have not reached a certain merit you wont qualify to participate.
Merit is a clear indication that a member is contributing positively to the content of the forum.
As for signatures being removed, I cannot see it happening,
the signatures add so much on a few levels to the forum and with the merit system in place it will improve the posts by signature participants,
it should be an upwards spiral of sorts.
Signature campaign is one of the best way to advertise or promote ICO or any project in crypto world, that is why i do not think this method will be removed in this forum. About merit system if all the campaign manager make it a basis i think many shit poster will not be able to join in the campaign.
Correct, signature campaign was used by many ICO developer to promote their coin specially if trusted or higher ranked member of this forum wear the signature of their project it has a big impact to many investors because it also one of the basis for good ICO. Yes, now merit system was included in selecting participants in signature campaign that is why it is a real nightmare for the spammers.
Signature campaign is one of the best way to advertise or promote ICO or any project in crypto world, that is why i do not think this method will be removed in this forum. About merit system if all the campaign manager make it a basis i think many shit poster will not be able to join in the campaign.
If signature campaigns have been running for years and are still running, it clearly shows that these signature campaigns are profitable for marketers to run and they do get clicks. Posts on this forum can be found on Google, and with some people having thousands and thousands of posts, it's very likely even someone browsing Google for information that somehow lands on Bitcointalk will click on a signature after getting the information they need, as one change in avatar and signature means the signature and avatar is changed on all of your posts.
They can recover the advertising costs with just few high playing costs. Especially the gambling relates websites can get monthly paying customers here. This forum is related to crypto which is emerging and this is the only reason we have such an earning opportunity for members here.
You don't understand how spending your time promoting and advertising something you claim to be useless is silly, irrational or inconsistent?
You are proud to be getting paid for something you seem to know is worthless, not contributory and you admit that you should not be getting paid as much?
You are proud to be getting paid for something you seem to know is worthless, not contributory and you admit that you should not be getting paid as much?
I don't know. I just think so. And as I mentioned earlier I can be wrong. The fact I wear signature doesn't harm anyone. There is a slight chance it doesn't benefit anyone either. That's why I don't see any inconsistency in my behavior. A smoker analogy is not the best in this case (btw many smokers DO say smoking is bad and no one should do that). I'd rather say I'm a Formula 1 driver who takes money for wearing Toyota underwear - it doesn't harm anyone, it doesn't benefit anyone (probably) but if Toyota thinks it'll help them in some way and they're ready to pay for that - why should I refuse?
You're right, you don't have to believe a signature is a good advertisement to wear it, but it proves how easily you will sell-out and promote something you don't agree with, are actively campaigning against and believe to be worthless.
As I said I promote only those projects I like. In the case signature make any difference.
I don't understand how the fact I think signature campaigns are useless as a marketing tool and the fact I'm wearing a signature shows some kind of hypocrisy or inconsistency. I don't have to believe that signature is a good advertisement to wear it.
You don't understand how spending your time promoting and advertising something you claim to be useless is silly, irrational or inconsistent?
You are proud to be getting paid for something you seem to know is worthless, not contributory and you admit that you should not be getting paid as much?
You're right, you don't have to believe a signature is a good advertisement to wear it, but it proves how easily you will sell-out and promote something you don't agree with, are actively campaigning against and believe to be worthless. This is like a smoker talking about how disgusting cigarettes are while they are smoking; you're a hypocrite or at least inconsistently manifesting your behavior in accordance to your voiced principals/opinion.
If you do not understand how your actions and your words are contradictory to one another then there isn't much left for us to discuss. I was just saying you should probably reevaluate your position on signature campaigns in rhetoric or reevaluate your actions by promoting them.
I don't understand how the fact I think signature campaigns are useless as a marketing tool and the fact I'm wearing a signature shows some kind of hypocrisy or inconsistency. I don't have to believe that signature is a good advertisement to wear it. But I have to admit that "useless" is not what I meant to say. I rather think signature campaigns aren't worth money people spend on them. Hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent to promote dozens ICOs on one particular forum (even the biggest one) - I don't think it's beneficial enough. Personally I know at least two ICOs where devs just don't want to pay for their bounty campaigns (but they probably will have to do that) just because they got almost nothing from them and have to pay a LOT of money.
Nevertheless I try to promote projects I like in the case I'm wrong about all these bounty campaigns so no hypocrisy or inconsistency at all.
They are effective, but not as much as they were a few years ago. The forums become to saturated with adverts that people are simply automatically skipping them in their mind. It happens on websites that you visits and the adverts are there, but you never really read them or take notice. It's one of the reasons why stickies are often ignored in the forums. Nevertheless I try to promote projects I like in the case I'm wrong about all these bounty campaigns so no hypocrisy or inconsistency at all.
A few people claimed a while back that they could live off the referral links that they had in their signatures, but if they were to try that in todays market it likely wouldn't yield the same results.
I do believe they'd disappear just because they are useless as a marketing tool.
You have a signature campaign running on your profile, right now.
At the same time you are calling them useless. The hypocrisy or at least inconsistency is entertaining.
You claim they are useless, but I bet you can name almost every company that runs a signature campaign around here (assuming you spend any significant amount of time here). They are not useless, because anybody that has the time will probably do some research on the company, organization or project to see what is up. At least this is what I do, and if it is something I believe in then I will start using, investing or playing (if it's a casino). Hard to say that they're useless, when they're doing exactly as they are intended to.
I don't understand how the fact I think signature campaigns are useless as a marketing tool and the fact I'm wearing a signature shows some kind of hypocrisy or inconsistency. I don't have to believe that signature is a good advertisement to wear it. But I have to admit that "useless" is not what I meant to say. I rather think signature campaigns aren't worth money people spend on them. Hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent to promote dozens ICOs on one particular forum (even the biggest one) - I don't think it's beneficial enough. Personally I know at least two ICOs where devs just don't want to pay for their bounty campaigns (but they probably will have to do that) just because they got almost nothing from them and have to pay a LOT of money.
Nevertheless I try to promote projects I like in the case I'm wrong about all these bounty campaigns so no hypocrisy or inconsistency at all.
How do signature campaigns generate revenue for Theymos?
Do the campaigns have to pay the forum to operate here? Or does the forum get a commission for every ad clicked through? Or is it because the campaigns drive traffic to the forum, which allows Theymos et al to charge more for the in-between-post ads?
I can't think of any other possibilities, but I'm still not confident that they get paid directly from campaigns.
Education please.
Do the campaigns have to pay the forum to operate here? Or does the forum get a commission for every ad clicked through? Or is it because the campaigns drive traffic to the forum, which allows Theymos et al to charge more for the in-between-post ads?
I can't think of any other possibilities, but I'm still not confident that they get paid directly from campaigns.
Education please.
It's that one. There would be a lot fewer people using the forum if they weren't getting paid to do so. Advertisers look at the site statistics before bidding for the advertising slots.
Last round resulted in 1.74 BTC revenue.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.30166373
https://bitcointalk.org/adrotate.php?adstats
Wow, and that's for 1 week of advertising. If we say 1.5 BTC is the average revenue earned for ads per week we're talking about 78 BTC earned per year, not bad!
Another important factor to consider for keeping the traffic up is that it's likely the newer members in this forum that click through to see these ads as they discover different players in the cryptocurrenc market.
Signature campaigns are one of the methods I use to get funds in buying cryptos for long term. Plus, it's a motivation for me to learn more about investments and other technical stuffs about cryptos.
Your account is a month old, today; I'm curious what is your definition of "long term"? Unless you have multiple accounts that are older than this you can't possibly have been earning crypto long term with signature campaigns, because 1-month is not long term.
You should not need to be paid in order to find motivation to learn about Bitcoin. You should either be interested in Bitcoin without being paid to post or you aren't really interested in Bitcoin, you are interested in being paid.
I only know 'long term' in theory based on what i read. i have only a few satoshis in my wallet and ether and tokens in other. I'm learning from my friends who do bitcoins for a year now and encourages me to invest long term soon. You may be right on that one, but i'm really interested in cryptocurrency as a whole. Personally, money is something I didn't have growing up so many might relate to my sentiment. But I appreciate your input... made me mull over your question.
If signature campaigns have been running for years and are still running, it clearly shows that these signature campaigns are profitable for marketers to run and they do get clicks. Posts on this forum can be found on Google, and with some people having thousands and thousands of posts, it's very likely even someone browsing Google for information that somehow lands on Bitcointalk will click on a signature after getting the information they need, as one change in avatar and signature means the signature and avatar is changed on all of your posts.
I read comment by the admin that if the merit system fails to reduce spam from the website, he might take decisions like removing the signature campaigns. This is scary for me. I am not eligible for any campaign yet but I was hopeful to get enrolled in one. If this is going to be implemented for sure, I might not be comfortable participating in discussions. I will though read posts by other members for information needed.
@O.P We will be paid for replying in this thread of yours thank you for creating it that how signature campaign works voila I learn something new today.
I don't believe signature campaigns would be banned (at least in the near future). But I do believe they'd disappear just because they are useless as a marketing tool.
Do your research before replying or rather make at least a standard comment I find your comment lacking the state of probability that it contributes anything, for the O.P itself, speaking of which it is like laconic in sense to understand by normal human beings.
Without marketing we wouldn't be able to meet each other in this community its like bitcoin itself just pop up like a psychedelic mushroom and we just happen to know it because we know horticulturist.
Signature campaigns are one of the methods I use to get funds in buying cryptos for long term. Plus, it's a motivation for me to learn more about investments and other technical stuffs about cryptos.
Your account is a month old, today; I'm curious what is your definition of "long term"? Unless you have multiple accounts that are older than this you can't possibly have been earning crypto long term with signature campaigns, because 1-month is not long term.
You should not need to be paid in order to find motivation to learn about Bitcoin. You should either be interested in Bitcoin without being paid to post or you aren't really interested in Bitcoin, you are interested in being paid.
I am against it. Because as someone who is very interested in cryptocurrency but disadvantaged because I have not much for investing, I somewhat panicked. Signature campaigns are one of the methods I use to get funds in buying cryptos for long term. Plus, it's a motivation for me to learn more about investments and other technical stuffs about cryptos. 
I do believe they'd disappear just because they are useless as a marketing tool.
You have a signature campaign running on your profile, right now.
At the same time you are calling them useless. The hypocrisy or at least inconsistency is entertaining.
You claim they are useless, but I bet you can name almost every company that runs a signature campaign around here (assuming you spend any significant amount of time here). They are not useless, because anybody that has the time will probably do some research on the company, organization or project to see what is up. At least this is what I do, and if it is something I believe in then I will start using, investing or playing (if it's a casino). Hard to say that they're useless, when they're doing exactly as they are intended to.
I don't believe signature campaigns would be banned (at least in the near future). But I do believe they'd disappear just because they are useless as a marketing tool.
Signature campaign will not be remove from the forum. You know why? There are lot of investors here in this organization or forum. Removing signature campaign will be also like removing some investments in bitcoin. Some of the members here like me are still waiting for the right to time to invest. So if you think that signature campaign will not be in help for possible investment then you are wrong. Think of it the bitcoin invesment from signature campaign increases the investment proceeds. And it will also help the investors to choose from the links given or posted as signature campaign.
Those signature campaigns are not promoting Bitcoins. They just pay in bitcoins.
There are quite a few factors involved in valuing advertising. Impressions are not really all that useful, what you need to know are the clickthrough rates, and the visits that result in sales. Second and third page hits and revisits are probably the most useful of the metrics, but only the advertisers know those stats. Most of the members posting here seem to be short of money, and are unlikely to be of value to advertisers. The bulk of the posts are of very low quality, and therefore are unlikely to stimulate buying actions in visitors to the site.
Improving the quality of the threads, and the addition of good commercial discussions should attract higher value views, and this could lead to an increase in potential revenue.
Improving the quality of the threads, and the addition of good commercial discussions should attract higher value views, and this could lead to an increase in potential revenue.
One thing you can see from the impression count is that the total is 4 to 5 times that of from logged in users. That to me would indicate that search results direct a lot of traffic here and that may be a more important driver to advertisers than the demographics of the members.
https://bitcointalk.org/adrotate.php?adstats
I would agree that content is the main driver behind that as not many people will be searching for "Great project".
From personal experience of leaving a referral link in my signature while I was absent from the forum for a couple of years, I can say the click through and signup rates were very impressive.
Jump to: