Topic: Free Advertising, YES or NO - page 3. (Read 854 times)

Yes it is counted and consider as free advertisement since one is not being paid yet. The bounty manager already knows about it but they keep it that way because it is the promotion for the project which bounty manager wanted to keep it up for longer and higher pay for that project.The better promotion it gets, the better pay and longer promotion it could get.

My few cents here in advertising for free does not really affect me as a user. Later on of the application the signature will be remove if not accepted. And if ever I gets accepted then it will not a free advertisement anymore because I will get paid.

There is nothing to worry about it as long as you advertise related cryptocurrency to which most of the users here wanted an improvement with it. I will be happy that I was able to help a project to advertise. Whatever improvement or success being done to that project it means also an improvement to cryptocurrency to which most of us here wanted a development in the world of cryptocurrency to get into the next level compared to what it achieved now.

So free advertisement will be okay for me at least I was helping that project and the users tha are promoting will get higher chances of getting payment. The success of other here is also our success. So let us help one another. But, still receiving few cents of reward still best than doing a free ads.

There are two options of the OP question.
1. Applicants are in a sig campaign, of course not using sig, wait for him to be accepted and then he will replace it.
2. The applicant is 'not' in the campaign / is single, meaning he is free to do what he wants, including installing sig & avatar, free advertising.

Conclusion: (I don't mind).

In general, managers choose campaign participants, not based on who is wearing a sig or avatar. The proof: many participants were accepted, from other campaigns, that's the point.

If chosen or not, by the campaign manager is not one thing to regret, even though within 1-2 days using free advertising sig & avatar.

If the user's confident when applying and to get accepted, I guess 2 days of wait isn't a matter.

And I didn't see any complaints yet with this reason (with only 2-3 days of wait), I guess this doesn't matter to them.

Also some users applied without wearing signatures just giving a note on application post and get accepted, and that could be applied to anyone though.

It's a free market: the campaign manager can ask anything, and the participant can choose whether or not to join.

This is better though.

That's a rule that many managers state in their requirements, but do not always enforce, maybe due to the fact that the users applying for their campaign may be currently wearing some other signature of some other campaign, and taking that off would mean they would lose their current spot without any guarantee of getting into the new one they are applying for.
Some may use it as a means to check for bugs in the sig codes when launching a campaign. While some actually try to exploit the participants.

Whether or not the rules are fair when enforced, the employer (and managers) reserves the right to make them and the applicants can aswell reject them by not applying.

I think this thread should be in service discussion board, not Meta.

It depends on manager and applicants.

If participants think they are truly good quality, and confident on their competitive, and don't want to promote free before get acceptance announcement, they can not wear avatar and signature.

If they think that wear avatar and signature can give them some advantages, they can wear it.

Some managers count posts since the application posts if people wear avatar and signature at the time then get acceptances later.

It is freedom.

Let the market choose what the right decision is. If the laborers/workers decide that the wages are worth the potential of exploitation, then that is their rational (presumably) action given their circumstances.

It is free advertising, but shouldn't you be a great poster when you're applying to a signature campaign anyway?

[/quote]Look, let me tell you this. There's a simple explanation to why I pooped my pants last Thursday. It wasn't because I had the tacos - I love that place - no it was because I got too nervous and you know I get the sweats. Yeah, the sweats, they're really bad; it's almost so bad that my pants get soaked and I need to start changing them but anyway that's getting too off-topic. All I'm saying is, I gotta get back to that Taco Bell. Those were some great burritos. [quote author="

I have had this on my mind lately and decided to create this thread to see how everyone feels about it. It is about advertising in signature campaigns. To be more precise about the free advertising that some companies/projects receive.

Let me give you some more information about what I mean.

As you know, signature campaigns have their own rules that you need to obey to apply for their campaigns. One of these rules is often:
Wear the avatar and signature when you apply! The campaign managers don't force the users to wear the sigs before they get accepted, but the rule is still there, and many users do.

People start to apply, put on their sigs and avatars, and there are dozens of applications. Let us say that it takes a campaign manager an average of 2 days to select campaign participants. The campaign receives a total of 50 applications, and 50 users are wearing their sigs/avatars even before they have been accepted. (it is just an example). Out of these 50 users, 10 will be selected as participants of the campaign. That means that 40 users have been advertising a campaign for free for 2 days.

How do you feel about that? Do you think it is OK that you just advertised a service for free and weren't selected in the campaign in the end?
Do you think it shouldn't be a requirement (mostly it isn't anyway) to wear an avatar/sig until you are accepted?