Topic: Change rules in bounty programs. - page 28. (Read 3748 times)
Hello! I had some such ICO s who change the rules in the middle of the game or when ICO almost is finished. Last of them ask make KYC registration but when ICO was starting they didn't say nothing about KYC
To be honest its quite dissapointing. In the first place they should finalize everything before offering bounties. It is okay at first when some changes on rules are made as long as bounty manager will post an early notice especially about on payment, ofcourse people who joined will tend to expect that they will be recieving their bounty payments in time.
Depends from what rules you are reffering. Which rules you mean? Changing bounty allocation? Bounty amount? Or other rules?
IMO, changing rules is fair as long as the reason of rules changing still reasonable.
IMO, changing rules is fair as long as the reason of rules changing still reasonable.
If a project is judged good and ripe it means there will be no changes to the regulations more could lead to many followers of the project be found objectionable
If they change rules right in the middle of the campaign then its a bad sign that the bounty campaign you are in is not being regulated much and has a bad PR and not sure about their project at all, bounty campaign with a good manager must be a good token to have.
I don't think it's fair, if the initial deal has paid a great while in the middle of the journey of the bounty paid down then the same has been lied to. but when the rules are changed only the usual rules only then it doesn't matter
I am against changing the rules, let alone payments and other serious issues in bounty programs. When you come to participate in the bounty, you can imagine how much you can earn.
Maybe in the beginning there is still a shortage of regulations so journey amid the bounty the rule changed. so in my opinion it doesn't matter as long as there's always the latest notice from the manager who runs the bounty
Honestly, I don't see it as a problem. As long as all participants will be paid according to their contributions, then it's fine with me. You know, if you try to understand ICO according to its definition, it simply just a new reference to a kind of crowdfunding or fundraising campaign. And as you probably know also, raising money for a fundraising campaign usually takes time to conclude unless, of course, they've accumulated enough money to support and finance their cause. Now whether one accepts it or not, all ICOs are like this. They are simply just a fundraising campaign. If they do not reach, say, their soft or hard cap, then expect that the people behind the ICO project will try to extend either their pre-sale or ICO to at least break even on their expenses. If they do that, expect also that they will try to change some of their rules, particularly about their bounties, that is, if they launched one.
and if ever the dev changes something in regard the campaign i think its their prerogative,its not easy running ico projects sometimes they didnt raised
enough fund to support the payments for the participants.i think whats important
is they still give payments even if its little bit smaller
Although there are sometimes scams going on bounties just like
signature campaign.but its their loss not ours
Just move on.lots of campaigns waiting for you
It was not supposed to happen because the same means of breaking a rule that has been set in advance. rather not actual but went sour as participants bounty inevitably must receive
Okay, because it's their policy. But if it's too detrimental then will probably be many who opposed the change of rule was or will be a lot of people who cancel follow the bounty
Frankly I hate this kind of things. I guess that any ICO which change the rules is lost a lot of confidence of its community and this will be the cause of dump after the listing for sure.
I gathered some information from friends about such situations. They gave me valuable advice that I want to tell. Most of these incidents happen in dubious companies. To avoid such problems, you need learn and analyze bounty, very carefully to choose them.
Good luck!
Good luck!
I hate bounty campaigns that change the rules when the campaign is nearly ending. And the worst part is they havent made or post any change in the rules on the first day of the campaign.
How do you feel about the fact that in some bounty companies change the date of delivery of reports. Change the amount of coins.
In general, at the height of the advertising company do what they want. I am amazed at this dishonest game. What is your opinion?
Their campaign their rules, to be honest changing rules in the middle of campaign or at the end(after end - cartaxy for example) isn't right thing to do. When they change rules all stakes before change should be counted by old rules and new stakes by new rules. Unfortunately we can't do much about it, no one is escrowing funds for bounty campaigns. In general, at the height of the advertising company do what they want. I am amazed at this dishonest game. What is your opinion?
How do you feel about the fact that in some bounty companies change the date of delivery of reports. Change the amount of coins.
In general, at the height of the advertising company do what they want. I am amazed at this dishonest game. What is your opinion?
I do not think it's dishonest, that's normal for many managers today are tackling it. And we have some plausible explanations for this, as usually the campaign is adding more people many managers choose to lower the reward to grab more people on the bonuses. In general, at the height of the advertising company do what they want. I am amazed at this dishonest game. What is your opinion?
Other times certain campaigns do not reach the number of users and there to not give a very large amount to few users the manager chooses to decrease the payment to leave the table balanced.
It is the wild wild west out there unfortunately. Personally I think as long as we get paid.
Well, that is one thing some investors do not really bother much about and not everyone actually like rules being changed in the middle of a program. There are so many reasons people invest in a project and those tiny little details matter. If you cannot work on your program right from the onset and stick to it, then that shows a high level of dishonesty just as OP states it.
Change of rules during the company is unacceptable, participants should not bear losses because of changes made by the management of the company.
How do you feel about the fact that in some bounty companies change the date of delivery of reports. Change the amount of coins.
In general, at the height of the advertising company do what they want. I am amazed at this dishonest game. What is your opinion?
Perhaps you’ve had a personal experience with an ICO that stiffed you? You might have the experience already to know a good deal of knowledge about crypto currency and its flow, so therefore, the simple learning through reading others’ posts and replying to newbie posts with wise counsel may not be enough of a partial reward in itself. I think if you were ripped off, you need to hound the folks at the helm of the ICO you were partnered up with. Otherwise, the silent wheel won’t get its grease. Sometimes, you might have to chalk it up i imagine if the ICO isn’t willing to compensate you through another avenue. It’s worth asking a dev about who works for the disputed ICO. In general, at the height of the advertising company do what they want. I am amazed at this dishonest game. What is your opinion?
No contracts, etc. all build on trust. This is a problem that is difficult to solve.
Everyone is angry when they pay less than they promised. But how to solve it. Just do not support the project in the future. Tell everyone that the project is bad.
Everyone is angry when they pay less than they promised. But how to solve it. Just do not support the project in the future. Tell everyone that the project is bad.
Jump to: