Topic: Is it a right approach a campaign decides where you to post? (Read 545 times)

If you think you will not be able to continue your posting activity by following specific rules of a campaign then its better not to apply there. Just apply there which campaign rules looks okay to you. Campaign mangers try to deliver optimum results for campaign owners and also create opportunities for community users.        

Yeap,,,,nice and simple solution. No one is forcing to join signature or following rules which looks weird.

I can't believe this is still a debate.

If you don't like the rules of the campaign don't enter it.  Why is this so difficult?  LMAO!!!

If I started a campaign and decided to have ULTRA ridiculous rules about where you can and can't post.  It's my campaign, and my bits, so my rules.  You would have every right to not join and post wherever you want, but not on my bits.  Perhaps read what you are getting into rather than just looking at the number of posts needed and the amount paid per post etc.

You can post where you want but I guess it’s OK for a campaign manager to say posts in shit subs like Off Topic or Politics don’t count towards your paid post total. That’s quite acceptable imo.

No. Even after hundreds of pages would be constructive discussions. But it would consider as a mega-thread. Every manager has their own criteria about the mega-thread, for me after 5 pages consider mega-thread is reasonable. The mega thread doesn't mean spam house, but not limited to. If I spam on Megathread then I am spammer, it doesn't prove thread is spam house. If any campaign manager or company doesn't want to see their signature after 5 pages then it depends on them, but even they don't count it they shouldn't remove from the campaign if the post is constructive, the manager knows very well if someone just making a post to getting pay. If someone unable to comply with their rules then they shouldn't apply as well.

I would say that campaign owners have the full right to make or change their own rules, and that includes removing members for posting in some threads that are known for producing lot of spam. Nobody can decide what and how you write and that is more important.
But question is should every thread with more than five pages be considered a spam house?
No. I don't think so.

Not necessarily increase the size, our eye is fine still now and we can read standard size, or we might zoom it appropriately.
Again, the matter isn't which board you are posting, it's a matter of Mega-thread. If your posting behavior is included mega-thread, then likely the company has the right to remove you. The signature campaign isn't officially related to the forum and companies aren't bound with any written contract except following forum rules. I will say they have been trying to prevent spam from mega-thread which is quite reasonable.

Again, this is limited and not the permanent solution. If the manager required 25 posts per week and you made 15 posts on mega-thread and 25 posts on good topics then how should handle? I know you made 25 good posts, but your other 15 post is on the mega thread. In that situation only not count the post and keep you in the campaign wouldn't be a good solution. Repeating every week the same thing would be led to you to remove from the campaign.

you have the full freedom to write if you are not in the signature campaign. Paid or non-paid posts, there is a difference.
I'm a little curious if all the excluded participants will continue to post in the same way and the same amount as during in campaign period.


once again, don’t forget, their money and their rules.

Just imagine if you are CM and need to read mega posts or participants where is eligible only 2 or 3 posts, and again next week, and... of course you will want to remove users like this to make your job easier and save time.

Guys,
This is all about the difference between,
if you post on some boards/topics you will be removed
and
your posts on some boards/topics will not be counted for minimum required posts and nothing more.

Thank you all for your inputs.

You always have rights to post anywhere on the forum. All your posts will be counted to activity if they are not spam and get deleted later. Freedom for posting and discussions.

No one prohibit you to post anywhere on the forum but if you make 20 posts in spam mega threads that are defined by a manager, you must have another 20 posts (so 40 posts total ) in non spam mega threads to get payments or to not be kicked out of campaign. You have freedom to choose what you do.

I think there should be no rules of limiting an user to post where. We are in a community and we are here for learning, sharing ideas and views, trading etc. We will post only in threads where we are interested in. Campaigns will take that benefit. I have suggested Bestchange to allow posts on local too so that they can give users the chance to posts where users get interested in. Anyway, if a campaign put some limitation, it will be either hard for participants to maintain quality or campaign manager will have hard times to choose the best user. If we take gambling sites campaign as example, we will find that a lot of users active in gambling sections are posting on there for only fulfilling the campaign requirements which eventually will generate spam for sure.
Anyway, it's up to campaign manager but I think they should give the freedom to post users as their wish but of course, they shouldn't allow any spammers in the campaign.

When you come in a house of your friend, you have to accept local rules in his house if he tells you that. The same rule acceptances for participation on the forum and in any campaign.

Companies which hire people to advertise their companies by wearing signature have their full rights to make any changes and decisions to accept or exclude any participants. Those rules are presented in OPs of campaigns, most of times.

If they play fair, they will pre-announce about changes that is what Best Change did. They (Best Change) played fairly by send out all payments for participants and their counted posts before kicking them out. Verifying quality and counting posts depend on personal perspective of managers like what forum moderators have same or different views on same report.

What is a more fairly solution I can think of? No.

If the campaign rules doesn't suit your style of posting them abstain from joining the campaign irrespective of the payrate they're offering. Ignoring this, will not only make it difficult for you to cope on the forum but it'll also turn you into some desperate shitposter. I remember drafting out a thread few months back titled; Factors to consider before joining a paid signature campaigns. On that thread I highlighted some important factors that personally guide me and I believe it might do the same to you and any other users that goes to read.

My response to this discussion, won't be any much different from what others have already said so I'll try to keep it as short as possible. You don't expect an employer to keep paying you when you're not been productive (atleast that's what they think) as they don't value post made in those sections, boards or thread you're constantly posting on.

Participating in a signature campaign is a privilege and not a right, No company accounting for expenses will pay you for advertising them on threads, boards they have no interest in so yes, 'when a campaign hires you, they have the right to demand for post from a targetted audience'. The best you can do for yourself to only join campaigns that suits your style of posting.

I'm saying I think they're wrong. It's their choice but it's not the best one. Not that it matters.

A 'megathread' will be killed off if it's nothing but hundreds of pages of posts that say 'nice project'.

It becomes a megathread because it's a relevant subject that grabs attention and keeps attention. The right thread will keep going for years, users will keep coming back to it and newcomers and the curious will read it the whole way through if it's filled with pertinent info. I certainly have.

If I wanted exposure for whatever that's the type of thread I'd want to be in vs what most of them are which is forgotten and never read again by the end of the same day they were created.

I would rather have my promotion in this - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/i-am-pretty-confident-we-are-the-new-wealthy-elite-gentlemen-12156

Than this - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/telegram-promotion-airdrop-bot-campaign-management-5262243

I think the rules that are used at BestChange should shake up a bit for everyone who carries signatures in other companies. This is actually a good motivation to make quality posts, such rules can only revive the forum.
It is high time to freeze those branches in which the same topic is discussed, told in different formulations. I am not a prophet, but I can assume that in the near future, there will be many more new topics.
It's time to accept the rules of the game and understand that wearing a signature is just a privilege of the forum. Just like that, no one owes anything to anyone.

"He who pays the piper calls the tune "

When yobit campaign launched people complain as it could generate spam, now there's a new campaign that would like to get rid of the spams, people still complain, that's the real definition of freedom, we have the freedom to complain, however in the end, if we are paid to work for a campaign, rules will always be followed, otherwise we won't get paid but we still have the right to post, it was never taken to us.

I believe OP referring to BestChange Campaign IMO. So answers will be based on that.

No, but it doesn't mean CM has to pay you for spam on mega-thread. They had warned their participants to avoid such as thread where likely no one will read your posts, which means no one notices their signature banner as well. So why they should keep a participant like this instead of finding some quality posters?

No, this wouldn't be a good solution. When a 10% post is spam from your post history then it means there would be more. So managers have the right to decide either you will stay on the campaign or not. Not counting those post isn't a solution, because they like to pay a good contributor.

Strongly disagree! Who is preventing your freedom of speech? They aren't asking you to don't make a post any board. But they told to avoid spam on Megathread and they consider mega-thread which have more than 5 page which is enough reasonable to me. Spam on mega-thread means they aren't caring where they are posting instead of the post read all the replies. They are just repeating the points already made. They don't like to pay such as participants. Why CM should follow our rules since they are the payer and we are the taker.

If you like the freedom of your speech then it's better to avoid applying on a signature campaign. You will found some users here that they aren't joining any campaigns even they are well-reputed.

If you don't like the rules then follow the below quote;

It was mentioned that this is about the BestChange signature campaign. Someone actually made a summary of the campaign manager's view and the posts count of the former participants.

pokeronlinestatus and stompix, I believe BestChange did what you guys are saying.

Isn't it better to disincentivise spam? Participation in the spam megathreads leads to further spam, and it's really hard to glean any additional information from someone's content when it gets buried by 400 semantically-identical posts with various padding strategies.

Imagine a forum where you were removed from a signature campaign if you helped contribute to spam threads: all the participants would be posting in discussions that have actual substance. Repeatedly pointing toward the volatility and manipulation of Bitcoin markets is not conducive to an interesting hub of ideas - something this forum should aim towards.

It's a form of contract you are undertaking - "In consideration for posting in these sections of the forum, we will make payment at the following rates."  The wording might differ from campaign to campaign, but in essence you are being paid to post (unedited I hasten to add).

In theory you could also be contracted to allow editorial content, but then again that could almost be construed as farming alt accounts.

Youre right. I remember also @tranthidung suggested to BC to allow maybe at least 10% of the total post can be on spam/mega thread.  But that's it. More than that could really affect their interest for the campaign. The solution is easy, make a 25 post as requirement for their campaign and have some extra for those sections you love to post. I think that would be a good way to please everyone for those who really love big section with more than 100 pages of post.

Their spending a lot of money, I guess its not bad to make it worthy right. Every business could have the same point. Also bestchange is not related to gambling sites, so there is really a chance that they will limit post on that section.

I was loooking for these information which campaign. BESTCHANGE!! One of the high paying campaign. But its definitely one of the abuse that the participants are doing actually. It may not be a violation to some campaigns but bestchjange are looking to advertise. Post on mega threads I guess will not be seen by users as matter of fact there are less users reading those replies. Bestchange I guess have learned and still trying to find ways to make use of their spending.

OP you are making this topic a BIG issue. The CM never imposed to avoid posting in MegaSpam thread but rather not counting it as paid post so everyone is free to post on any topic here just like what Yahoo said. If you are posting just for signature post then you should skip spam thread, there's thousand of threads out there that's still get few new reply and most of the MegaSpam thread receives already hundreds of redundant opinion.

The CM has the right to decide what topic should be counted because they are one who pays for it and also they apply the rules at the beginning of the round so everyone can see it before they start posting for that round.

---

This thread is misleading. It should be "Is it a right approach a campaign decides what post can be counted for payment?"

So, it came from the Bestchange decision last week. Already explained by logfiles. You are going to follow what manager instruct, otherwise, you are free to leave or manager will force you to leave.
In bestchange participants exclusion, manager gave early warning before 1 week so that users can change their posting habit. In fact, it's not about changing posting habit but to change posting in spam topic where no one gives attention which will be a total loss for the campaign.
Now again, bestchange campaign manager has said that they will allow couple of posts in spam Megathreads, may be it is 2/3 in their 25 weekly requirements. Now if you still have to post on such megathread to fulfill the requirement, I think manager has done the right step.
Take a loot at Chipmixer, they are paying for what? For quality. We have seen many people to get removed times to times. Why did Darkstar_ removed them? To get better output from the campaign and because the posters were spamming (may be, not sure). There's nothing wrong if campaign manager filter the participants times to times.

Not really. Although the rule is saying something which do not look good, but their intention is to prevent people posting in spam megathread. In such topics, advertiser got no benefits at all. That's why they wanted to filter participants who used to post on such topics.

Strange decision. There are plenty of long threads that are very worthy indeed and they'll have a much higher readership for much, much longer, and therefore exposure, than the countless 'where does we make most excellent profitings?' threads that run out of gas before they started.

Their rules of course but not very good ones. If I was financing the campaign I'd be a bit unimpressed myself.

OP, if the Campaign manager or the people behind the service being advertised decided to pause or end the signature campaign after payday citing negative results from what they are retrying to pay for, Is it considered infringement to basic rights and freedom of speech?

The answer to this question will help you figure out the answer to your post.

Exactly. Signature campaign users are not career people or hires. They are independent contractors that are getting paid to do ridiculously easy work... and when they can't even manage that, they get angry that they were fired for a shit job.

Entitlement city.

Capitalism yet again!

I think it’s time for us to form an union for the hard working signature campaigners. Who’s with me?! We deserve more! Maybe a minimum wage, vacations, health care and lambos as bonus?

It's as simple as.... if they are paying it's their rules... PERIOD!  If you don't like the rules, don't do the campaign.  Not sure why there is even a debate TBH.  This has absolutely NOTHING to do with free speech!



edit:
....and I have no skin in this game.  It's just logical. 

In the signature campaign rules it is clearly stated about the conditions Bestchange Signature Campaign.

It is clearly stated as the third point
- We reserve the right to make any changes to the conditions or end a campaign at any time.

Here everything gets included, the manager himself can make any changes to the campaign rules. So here we can't question the Campaign Manager. He has done everything within the written rules.

Myself too haven't met the campaign requirements of 25 posts at times, but with warnings for the next week I've been paid. This decision is the campaign manager's. Those are the kind heart and a way of helping.

When they pay for not meeting the requirements, they can also remove when one doesn't fulfill what the campaign manager and company running the campaign expect from an user.

Every campaign was the launch for a purpose and for the purpose to be achieved a certain rules and regulations must to be established so participants who cant deal with it may choose not to apply not to talk about joining.

I perfectly understand once i saw the OP message.

Absolutely, since the rules are clearly stated and all the participants are also aware that "they reserve the right to make any changes to the conditions or end a campaign at any time"

OP is referring to bestchange's signature campaign.
They removed few members because of posting on spam megathreads. According to the CM, any thread with more than 5 pages of replies is a spam megathread and some participants do not agree with this.

Honestly, I don't see what this have to do with freedom of speech! And if we are going to talk about rights, then they are within their rights to remove any participant who doesn't meet their standards.

Since you posted a link to this thread in best change signature discussion, i'll reflect on what was the issue there.

Firstly, i believe a signature campaign compan/manager HAS complete right to choose where he wants people he sponsors to posts. It's similar to non-crypto targeted advertising, basically you're paying money to reach out to certain groups of people.

Secondly, the issue with best change was, they didn't want people to post in certain boards and/or megathreads, which is fine. The problem is that most of the participants only fill out the minimum required post count for the week, that is 25 in this case. And when the manager deducts the posts which he doesn't want/like, those users are left with insufficient posts to meet the minimum required.
Now, if those users did 50 posts in a week, and lets say 20 of them are disqualified, they would still meet the minimum with their 30 posts that are left. But they didn't. They put minimal required effort, and now they cry about it.

Honestly, it was to be expected when you don't put anything but minimum effort into something

They can do what they want, it is their campaign and they pay people for promotion. No one is forcing anyone to participate in the campaign if you don't like how they work or how they make their decisions, but hey, everyone wants to get money and get their way...

It's not a communism or a socialism, it is a business partnership and if the results are not satisfactory one partner can pull out of the deal, end the deal, or find a better partner/s. Simple as that.

The problem is for people who participate in forum mostly because of money and sig campaigns, not the rules of campaigns. Campaigns should be like a hobby, not like a job.

That was my gut reaction when I read that part of OP's post, but I don't think he's saying anybody's rights are violated--that's my take on it at least. 

As far as a campaign kicking you out for posting in certain sections: I've never seen that as a campaign rule though I'll admit that I haven't read through all of the rules of every campaign.  But even if it was one of the rules, it's still completely fair.  If the campaign owner doesn't want posts being made in certain sections (like maybe in Gambling), it's their right to either not pay you if you post in a forbidden section (which is usually the case) or to even kick you out of the campaign if you violate that rule. 

And why?
That's why.  Be grateful these campaigns exist in the first place, because they may not be around forever.

Their money, their rules.
If they stated clearly that one will be excluded from their campaign if they made many posts in the threads they don't like. Then where is the problem?

Why it that when one is excluded from the campaign, they make it an issue, Why not also make it an issue when the sponsors or CM selects you to join their campaign out of the other hundreds of applicants?

If you feel the campaign does not satisfy your "basic rights and freedom of speech" then i believe also have a right to leave or not to apply for the campaign, No?

Oh, the freedom of speech! Oh, our rights are being violated!!!
You have the freedom of writing everywhere you want, that doesn't mean you have the right to get paid!

If they pay for let's say 20 posts and you make 10 posts in the boards they pay for and 10 in off-topic the campaign manager might think he has a better alternative, a poster who posts in the areas where he needs to maximize his advertisement and since they have probably limited slots it doesn't sound right for them to keep someone who is not adding as much as others to the pile. Just because you reached the minimum requirement it doesn't mean you have some legal contract and the manager must preserve your place for eternity.

Are you referring to spam threads/mega threads? The people paying for the ads campaign have the right to create the rules that fits their agenda. If they don't accept posts in mega threads, that is their decision. If the majority of your posts are in such threads, you will not offer them the visibility they want.
I think a warning should be issued before, and if the posting behavior doesn't change those running the campaign have the right to take more serious actions. In this case excluding users from their campaign. It is their campaign and you need to play by their rules.  

Users are normally free to post wherever they want but some sections/posts may not be counted. For example I exclude many sections I feel are spammy as well as I do not count bounty posts or posts in other campaign threads. Posts in Games & Rounds, Off topic, Lending, Auctions, Politics & Society, Beginners and help,Tokens, or Archival will not count are my normal restricted sections.

If users post in these sections, they simply are not counted and a user must post in the other sections to get his/her weekly quota.

No, it doesn't sound right at all. I never saw such a ridiculous rule. Do you have an example? Is there now a campaign running and having this rule


Yes, that's how all of them do. At least this is what I saw so far.

A campaign can have rules on what are the board's/topic's posts are countable for payment and what are not.

But, a rule like if you post on some topics or boards then you will lose your slot, is it right approach?

The better rule should be, not counting those posts.

As per basic rights and freedom of speech, we all should be allowed to write anywhere of this forum (as long as this forum allows) and a campaign may exclude posts as per their rules from counting toward payment and should not cost the spot if minimum post count is reached after excluding posts which are done on excluded section/board/topics.

I like to listen your views on this.