Topic: Is it ok to lock your bounty for 4 months (Read 21622 times)
IMO project locked 90% of bounty reward for 12months and bounty hunters are not even sure if the project will still be alive by then, 4month is not very far and if this will help the project in any way then its all good
With the current market condition, blocking coins even for a much longer time seems to be a very good solution. The blocking period gives the project time to develop and prove its potential. A few months should allow to achieve the first successes and interest investors. Thanks to this, project can avoid a drop in the price of the coin immediately after listing on the exchange.
It would be a good solution but it will only satisfy us if we are also seeing some kind of improvement by the project although we don't hold the token reward yet, some of the projects I joined hold the bounty and I have not seen their progress, that's really disappointing. This does not necessarily have to be the way .. If developers are active and the project moves forvard, many bounty hunters during the lock period, may notice the chances of making a profit by not selling tokens at the very beginning. In other words, if there is no blockade, everyone will want to sell immediately and the price will definitely fall. When there is a blockade, there is a chance that there will be no such problem.
With the current market condition, blocking coins even for a much longer time seems to be a very good solution. The blocking period gives the project time to develop and prove its potential. A few months should allow to achieve the first successes and interest investors. Thanks to this, project can avoid a drop in the price of the coin immediately after listing on the exchange.
It would be a good solution but it will only satisfy us if we are also seeing some kind of improvement by the project although we don't hold the token reward yet, some of the projects I joined hold the bounty and I have not seen their progress, that's really disappointing. With the current market condition, blocking coins even for a much longer time seems to be a very good solution. The blocking period gives the project time to develop and prove its potential. A few months should allow to achieve the first successes and interest investors. Thanks to this, project can avoid a drop in the price of the coin immediately after listing on the exchange.
It would be a good solution but it will only satisfy us if we are also seeing some kind of improvement by the project although we don't hold the token reward yet, some of the projects I joined hold the bounty and I have not seen their progress, that's really disappointing. This is a risk that can only be reduced by thorough analysis of the project and developers before joining the bounty program or investing.
At the moment of the bull market there is no problem with the inflow of new funds, so blocking is not needed. However, during the bear market period, unfortunately, this is often the only solution.
With the current market condition, blocking coins even for a much longer time seems to be a very good solution. The blocking period gives the project time to develop and prove its potential. A few months should allow to achieve the first successes and interest investors. Thanks to this, project can avoid a drop in the price of the coin immediately after listing on the exchange.
It would be a good solution but it will only satisfy us if we are also seeing some kind of improvement by the project although we don't hold the token reward yet, some of the projects I joined hold the bounty and I have not seen their progress, that's really disappointing.
With the current market condition, blocking coins even for a much longer time seems to be a very good solution. The blocking period gives the project time to develop and prove its potential. A few months should allow to achieve the first successes and interest investors. Thanks to this, project can avoid a drop in the price of the coin immediately after listing on the exchange.
It depends, if holding the coin will make it more value or avoid dumps then it's worth the waiting, all this lockings starts after bear market took over, project teams don't have a choice but to use different ideas to keep coin value alive
Locking bounty tokens to bounty participants is common for bounty projects, most projects now often lock bounty tokens so that participants cannot sell them directly when tokens are distributed to participants. Actually, if this is in the bounty rules, that's okay, so before you join the bounty project, read the rules first so that we know that after the tokens are distributed to bounty participants, the tokens are locked or not.
but usually in written rules about the developer or BM can change any rules and of course it becomes one of the risks that must be faced because of the problem is, whether the project will really continue to develop or not, if during the time period the project like there is no change which promises then it will be something very bad
Locking bounty tokens to bounty participants is common for bounty projects, most projects now often lock bounty tokens so that participants cannot sell them directly when tokens are distributed to participants. Actually, if this is in the bounty rules, that's okay, so before you join the bounty project, read the rules first so that we know that after the tokens are distributed to bounty participants, the tokens are locked or not.
If you plan to hold your favorite tokens for a long time, I think there is no problem with locking for 4 months. If you are a short-term trading operator, such a solution is not desirable.
Joining bounty that offers legit platform can be trustworthy, and I guess when that bounty rewards locked within 4 months then the results can be promising it wouldn't be a problem. But, I don't think that's acceptable for the bounty hunters, longing for some value on their tokens after waiting for so long and yet they couldn't trade their asset because it wasn't listed in any trading site.
It would be better for those developers to don't run a bounty project if they can't accommodate to provide their token enough funds for trading.
It would be better for those developers to don't run a bounty project if they can't accommodate to provide their token enough funds for trading.
This is totally insane for project managers to decide on such a decision on prior to distribution, why not before or during the bounty campaign but rather prior to distribution. Do they think this solves dumping, I know of many projects that locked their token and it even dumped more than they expected. Locking is not the antidote for dumping.
Not informing about the blocking period at the very beginning is very unfair, same asn not informing that KYC will be required.
However, the idea itself is not completely insane. Often the project needs a few months to attract the eyes of investors, especially in the situation in which the market is now. So finally it can also be very profitable for bounty hunters.
We see this type of situation from the bounty companies. In the beginning, they won't mention any locking period and KYC but after collecting enough, they will start teasing the bounty hunters to send the documents for KYC verification. We have experienced this type of companies which sometimes we don't receive the bounty at all.
Its part of their character, another coin that threatens to lock bounty hunter's share is Adab although it is not yet confirmed, there's a possibility they are going to, it's a big buzz in their channel, Adab falls into a dubious character in bounty hunting, they have no announcement of KYC after the ICO they announce they will ask for KYC, they promised they will send all bounty hunter's rewards, but they cut it with a whipping 80% there's no future here in Adab.
This is totally insane for project managers to decide on such a decision on prior to distribution, why not before or during the bounty campaign but rather prior to distribution. Do they think this solves dumping, I know of many projects that locked their token and it even dumped more than they expected. Locking is not the antidote for dumping.
Not informing about the blocking period at the very beginning is very unfair, same asn not informing that KYC will be required.
However, the idea itself is not completely insane. Often the project needs a few months to attract the eyes of investors, especially in the situation in which the market is now. So finally it can also be very profitable for bounty hunters.
We see this type of situation from the bounty companies. In the beginning, they won't mention any locking period and KYC but after collecting enough, they will start teasing the bounty hunters to send the documents for KYC verification. We have experienced this type of companies which sometimes we don't receive the bounty at all.
This KYC is the one i am affraid to do.
More project affraid of bounty hunters to sell thier token once its listed in exchange thats why owner make a move to lock the token and give it time mostly it takes 3 months before you can move your token once its locked.
They dont see that the reason of the price declining is not only bounty hunters sometimes its investors it self they are affraid lossing so they will sell thier token even with just small profit .
This is totally insane for project managers to decide on such a decision on prior to distribution, why not before or during the bounty campaign but rather prior to distribution. Do they think this solves dumping, I know of many projects that locked their token and it even dumped more than they expected. Locking is not the antidote for dumping.
Not informing about the blocking period at the very beginning is very unfair, same asn not informing that KYC will be required.
However, the idea itself is not completely insane. Often the project needs a few months to attract the eyes of investors, especially in the situation in which the market is now. So finally it can also be very profitable for bounty hunters.
We see this type of situation from the bounty companies. In the beginning, they won't mention any locking period and KYC but after collecting enough, they will start teasing the bounty hunters to send the documents for KYC verification. We have experienced this type of companies which sometimes we don't receive the bounty at all.
This is totally insane for project managers to decide on such a decision on prior to distribution, why not before or during the bounty campaign but rather prior to distribution. Do they think this solves dumping, I know of many projects that locked their token and it even dumped more than they expected. Locking is not the antidote for dumping.
Not informing about the blocking period at the very beginning is very unfair, same asn not informing that KYC will be required.
However, the idea itself is not completely insane. Often the project needs a few months to attract the eyes of investors, especially in the situation in which the market is now. So finally it can also be very profitable for bounty hunters.
This is totally insane for project managers to decide on such a decision on prior to distribution, why not before or during the bounty campaign but rather prior to distribution. Do they think this solves dumping, I know of many projects that locked their token and it even dumped more than they expected. Locking is not the antidote for dumping.
i think it is in the best opinion of the project in the eyes of the team and developers, it is not what we can actually give our own opinion since it is morely the say of the team. the lock up period, in most cases is to allow the stability of the token/coin price in the market to allow it gain sufficient liquidity to enable them withstand the dumping from the hunters.
It's a nice idea in the terms that it prevents dumping of the tokens price to worthless price, because lots of bounties hunters don't care about the development of the project all what they care about is to get the tokens and keep dumping
As a bounty hunter such a system is not good, most of which I see as the project works, it seems that the developer who owns the token holder will be able to make a profit first while he or she is making a lot of money in exchange, then The project team said that once the bounty hunters give the rewards they often have to beat the price in exchange, that's a big fuss and they're just making excuses.
I used to with it, so this is okay for me. But they did not mention before the bounty campaign, this is a shady behavior of them. They should've mentioned it at the beginning of the campaign! Right now, all the coin's price is very low, some coins dumped more than 95% from its previous price. So, this is not a good time to come in the trading market for some projects, because they will not able to protect the price. So, I don't blame them for locking up bounty tokens for months, but Liker team did mistake by not informing hunters before.
Jump to: