Hey, guys.
Projects raise millions of dollars in ETH. Participants of the bounty campaigns significantly help them to do this.
Would it be fair if the participants will receive ETH for their work? Or 50% in ETH and 50% in tokens?
This is good but it is impossible to happen because the ICO are promoting their own altcoin too in which they should promote their token more in order for them to be known that is why some ICO are giving their token for free in we called this air drops. They are using the ethereum but limited to platform only so that investors could easily trade at the cheaper price.
Thanks for your opinion. You know, a few bounty campaign examples of 50\50 already exist, probably the founders of these projects found this solution beneficial. Likely that this approach may be even more effective influence on the promotion of the token.
Wow! That is new!! I have not really seemed much of this kind of project and it would be nice to hit one. If we really want to take a real look at it, most of the people who get to dump their coins a lot are usually the bounty hunters which always affect the market value once listed, although some investors do too, but most serious investors hardly do. If they can pay in ETH, then this can be limited.
Hey, guys.
Projects raise millions of dollars in ETH. Participants of the bounty campaigns significantly help them to do this.
Would it be fair if the participants will receive ETH for their work? Or 50 to 50?
One thing most people do not understand is that if you are promoting a project, you are also an investor and then you earn in stakes. Although, I feel the OP as payments in ETH can really be good, but do you know that there are chances of you earning more when the tokens get listed and even dumping and buying more at dips if you are fast enough?
Thank you for your thoughts
I in many respects agree with you. Especially on account of this:
One thing most people do not understand is that if you are promoting a project, you are also an investor and then you earn in stakes
The only one thing I would say is that I still think that people understand it, it is simply historically that money investments have a higher status than time investments. Although in general time is more valuable than money by default. And the status of a "money investor" and a "time investor" is at least equal. This is certainly general enough, since there can be different situations,
but without money you can create a project, but without time, abilities and efforts of supporters is impossible. And that's why crowdsourcing is more promising than crowdfunding!