I don't know why there is no concern that most (if not all) signature campaigns are related to gambling, the forum is less diverse and the number of campaigns is less and therefore no matter what your rank is over time you will have to post in sections or specialties that you don't like.
In other words I don't think there is a problem in finding good members because there are a lot of good accounts without paid signatures and since there is a lot of demand and less supply (fewer campaigns) campaign managers can set any conditions without problems.
Topic: New way for sig campaigns - page 5. (Read 1818 times)
Take a look at the campaign I quoted earlier $6 for 30 posts is $180 a week as far as I know and
I saw that. But my guess is that there will only be 2-3 slots for a maximum of $6 per post, and as a relatively new campaign, there is still no basis that it will last for a long period. I would rather give this campaign a little more time to prove its long-term stability.
I sincerely hope that my scepticism is unfounded, because we need new campaigns, especially those that are long-term, especially if they have a high payment rate.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
I realized this a long time ago, and instead of talking, I just do it for several years now (although I must admit I found it funny that you mentioned how someone allegedly initiated it first). I track how active a user is in a discussion thread, the total number of posts, the number of positive feedback received, the preferred sections of the publication, how many merits a user receives in the context of 1 week, and I also know how many merits a week on average are received in each of the campaigns that I manage, and much more (thanks to Loyce, who has repeatedly changed the parameters of his software to suit my needs). I even mentioned some points so that those who submit applications have an understanding of what is expected of them.
Without wishing to enter into polemics between managers, yahoo62278 was talking about paying participants on that basis, not just selecting them. Do any of your campaigns pay like that? I haven't checked them in a while. In the quote I posted some Legendary may get paid $6 and other Legendaries $3, while Hero or Sr. Member might get paid $4 or $5 per post. I don't recall seeing such a proposal in your campaigns.
To establish high-standard conditions, a competitive payment rate must accompany them. Looking further back, the maximum payment rate dropped from $100-$150 per week to an average of $60-$80. Which is more than twice less, including inflation.
The next thing is that campaigns are often short-lived, so it is difficult to expect a highly respectable poster to leave a stable campaign and switch to a better-paid one that will most likely end in a few weeks.
The next thing is that campaigns are often short-lived, so it is difficult to expect a highly respectable poster to leave a stable campaign and switch to a better-paid one that will most likely end in a few weeks.
Take a look at the campaign I quoted earlier $6 for 30 posts is $180 a week as far as I know and
Unlike other campaigns on Bitcointalk, the BetFury campaign has a full-year budget already agreed upon. This gives me the confidence to plan steadily without worrying about the campaign ending unexpectedly. If there is any decision to close the campaign, you will be informed at least 4 weeks in advance.
You still have time to apply. You are welcome.
yahoo62278, you summed things up well. As you can see, some managers already apply an approximate criterion, perhaps someone should analyze their campaigns and make a judgment about how effective such a method is.
However, there was a "rule" that you left out. To establish high-standard conditions, a competitive payment rate must accompany them. Looking further back, the maximum payment rate dropped from $100-$150 per week to an average of $60-$80. Which is more than twice less, including inflation.
The next thing is that campaigns are often short-lived, so it is difficult to expect a highly respectable poster to leave a stable campaign and switch to a better-paid one that will most likely end in a few weeks.
However, there was a "rule" that you left out. To establish high-standard conditions, a competitive payment rate must accompany them. Looking further back, the maximum payment rate dropped from $100-$150 per week to an average of $60-$80. Which is more than twice less, including inflation.
The next thing is that campaigns are often short-lived, so it is difficult to expect a highly respectable poster to leave a stable campaign and switch to a better-paid one that will most likely end in a few weeks.
- Merit earned
- Quality of posts
Secondly, what makes quality of people to reduce is much alt, so if I'm a campaign manager, I will figure out some people alt and if I notice that you have more than two accts you will not be selected in my campaign.
- Length of posts on average
- Trust
I think it's time for a change! [...]
I realized this a long time ago, and instead of talking, I just do it for several years now (although I must admit I found it funny that you mentioned how someone allegedly initiated it first). I track how active a user is in a discussion thread, the total number of posts, the number of positive feedback received, the preferred sections of the publication, how many merits a user receives in the context of 1 week, and I also know how many merits a week on average are received in each of the campaigns that I manage, and much more (thanks to Loyce, who has repeatedly changed the parameters of his software to suit my needs). I even mentioned some points so that those who submit applications have an understanding of what is expected of them.[1]: When reviewing applications, the campaign manager pays attention to many details, including; how informative and organic your posts are, for what and how often you get merit, do you have a customized trust list and do you use a feedback system. A sig campaign is an “ad” for the customer and a “hobby” for the participants, so the manager will definitely pay attention to whether you have shown interest in previously promoted projects. The above points are a sure way to understand whether you will be useful for promoting a particular project or service.
Whoever wants credit can have it.
I think, you made a good point that will take the forum to another next level next year. But there are some campaign managers that will not like to follow this system, because it will make them feel as if they are bringing the high rank members down, you have said it before in this thread, that the way you view quality Posts, it may be different the way others managers view quality Posts and it will going to make some legendary or hero members to hate your decision, but to me is a good idea that will improve the forum which is what you stand, if all managers in the signature campaign can be honest in their selection like what other honest managers have be doing. Are you sure other signature campaign managers will agree to follow this system to select their participants in their various campaigns? I know that many managers have different ways of selecting their participants in their campaign to make their clients happy over the job done. Happy new year to all the managers in this forum.
Doesn't matter if other managers want to go my route, icopress route, royse route, ir their own route. Looks like we all have some similarities so IMO they're all good for the forum as far as keeping the spam down. 
I can understand because it's all about demand and supply, although I don't really know the situation in the past, but currently the supply (users who've achieved at least full member rank) are too many while the demand (campaign) aren't enough to accept all of them.
However, I don't think this tier system is something new, campaign managers always look into everything and other criteria to accept the participants. If there's a new rank system after 1K merit, it's high likely the higher rank will receive higher reward.
But, since there's no difference with the title between user with 1K merit and 10K merit, hence campaign managers value 10K merit is more knowledgeable than 1K merit.
However, I don't think this tier system is something new, campaign managers always look into everything and other criteria to accept the participants. If there's a new rank system after 1K merit, it's high likely the higher rank will receive higher reward.
But, since there's no difference with the title between user with 1K merit and 10K merit, hence campaign managers value 10K merit is more knowledgeable than 1K merit.
I think it's time for a change! [...]
I realized this a long time ago, and instead of talking, I just do it for several years now (although I must admit I found it funny that you mentioned how someone allegedly initiated it first). I track how active a user is in a discussion thread, the total number of posts, the number of positive feedback received, the preferred sections of the publication, how many merits a user receives in the context of 1 week, and I also know how many merits a week on average are received in each of the campaigns that I manage, and much more (thanks to Loyce, who has repeatedly changed the parameters of his software to suit my needs). I even mentioned some points so that those who submit applications have an understanding of what is expected of them.[1]: When reviewing applications, the campaign manager pays attention to many details, including; how informative and organic your posts are, for what and how often you get merit, do you have a customized trust list and do you use a feedback system. A sig campaign is an “ad” for the customer and a “hobby” for the participants, so the manager will definitely pay attention to whether you have shown interest in previously promoted projects. The above points are a sure way to understand whether you will be useful for promoting a particular project or service.
I think, you made a good point that will take the forum to another next level next year. But there are some campaign managers that will not like to follow this system, because it will make them feel as if they are bringing the high rank members down, you have said it before in this thread, that the way you view quality Posts, it may be different the way others managers view quality Posts and it will going to make some legendary or hero members to hate your decision, but to me is a good idea that will improve the forum which is what you stand, if all managers in the signature campaign can be honest in their selection like what other honest managers have be doing. Are you sure other signature campaign managers will agree to follow this system to select their participants in their various campaigns? I know that many managers have different ways of selecting their participants in their campaign to make their clients happy over the job done. Happy new year to all the managers in this forum.
I think you've been beaten to it, yahoo62278.
I don't apply for campaigns so 100% chance I have never seen this, but glad I am not the only 1 thinking differently. I'm sure there will be differences between the 2 managers. CAMPAIGN REWARDS
- Sr+: $2.00 to $6.00 P/P ⛔ Read hover note.
Quote from: ⛔ Read hover note
Apply for your current rank. Shortlisted applicants will receive a PM with the offered rate. Rewards will be determined based on your profile influence, post quality, profile history, and several other factors like Merit, DT status, Trust feedback etc. Please DO NOT request a spot via PM unless you have been explicitly invited to join one of my campaigns.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
I think you've been beaten to it, yahoo62278.
CAMPAIGN REWARDS
- Sr+: $2.00 to $6.00 P/P ⛔ Read hover note.
Quote from: ⛔ Read hover note
Apply for your current rank. Shortlisted applicants will receive a PM with the offered rate. Rewards will be determined based on your profile influence, post quality, profile history, and several other factors like Merit, DT status, Trust feedback etc. Please DO NOT request a spot via PM unless you have been explicitly invited to join one of my campaigns.
Being a member on this forum and seeing the same thing done over and over (definition of insanity) has got me to thinking, why not change the way the system is? 10 years I have been around and it's been users can earn some bitcoin/altcoin/tokens based on rank mostly. Custom deals now and then for those that have earned it, but only a few get those.
I think it's time for a change!!! Too long now have we sat back and paid laziness just because of rank. Users buy/sell/trade accounts hoping to come here and start earning money and some earn decent wages (depending on the area they come from) based off of rank alone. Why should someone be paid due to rank alone? I feel like we need to start paying users based on other stuff such as:
May add more to this based off of some of the responses I read in this thread. This is a work in progress that I plan on implementing next week.
What does all this mean? Well I plan on rank not being a deciding factor in how much a user makes. I want to introduce a tier system. In this tier system, your rank means absolutely nothing. You can be a full member and make what a legendary member might be making in another campaign. It's all going to depend on you the user and where I feel you land on the tier system.
Users in tier 1 will basically be considered the Legendary/Hero in a campaign
Users in Tier 2 basically your SR members
Users in tier 3 Full member and below
Again this has nothing to do with your rank, just giving you an idea of what I mean. You will be entered into a spreadsheet as a tier # not a rank.
Is this going to piss some of the higher ranked people off? I sincerely hope so. Not because I want people to hate me or dislike my management style, but because I know how huge the sense of entitlement is on this forum and some will feel threatened because they think well I'm a legendary I should be making the best money here. Fact of the matter is, Signature campaigns are a privilege, and you need to earn your keep. You represent a brand and managers as well as users need to be a little more accountable.
Like I said this is a work in progress and I make change some things.
I am not saying that shitposters will never be hired because let's face it, everyone has a different idea of a quality user and sometimes spots need filled. I always like to give people a chance until they burn that chance.
Thoughts and comments are welcome.
This topic is self moderated, but I will not delete comments unless it's 100% spam. Stay on topic please
Since I don't apply for campaigns I had not seen this but looks like Royse has started something similar.
I think it's time for a change!!! Too long now have we sat back and paid laziness just because of rank. Users buy/sell/trade accounts hoping to come here and start earning money and some earn decent wages (depending on the area they come from) based off of rank alone. Why should someone be paid due to rank alone? I feel like we need to start paying users based on other stuff such as:
- Merit earned
- Quality of posts
- Sections they frequent
- Posts they do on average weekly
- Trust
May add more to this based off of some of the responses I read in this thread. This is a work in progress that I plan on implementing next week.
What does all this mean? Well I plan on rank not being a deciding factor in how much a user makes. I want to introduce a tier system. In this tier system, your rank means absolutely nothing. You can be a full member and make what a legendary member might be making in another campaign. It's all going to depend on you the user and where I feel you land on the tier system.
Users in tier 1 will basically be considered the Legendary/Hero in a campaign
Users in Tier 2 basically your SR members
Users in tier 3 Full member and below
Again this has nothing to do with your rank, just giving you an idea of what I mean. You will be entered into a spreadsheet as a tier # not a rank.
Is this going to piss some of the higher ranked people off? I sincerely hope so. Not because I want people to hate me or dislike my management style, but because I know how huge the sense of entitlement is on this forum and some will feel threatened because they think well I'm a legendary I should be making the best money here. Fact of the matter is, Signature campaigns are a privilege, and you need to earn your keep. You represent a brand and managers as well as users need to be a little more accountable.
Like I said this is a work in progress and I make change some things.
I am not saying that shitposters will never be hired because let's face it, everyone has a different idea of a quality user and sometimes spots need filled. I always like to give people a chance until they burn that chance.
Thoughts and comments are welcome.
This topic is self moderated, but I will not delete comments unless it's 100% spam. Stay on topic please
Since I don't apply for campaigns I had not seen this but looks like Royse has started something similar.
CAMPAIGN REWARDS
- Sr+: $2.00 to $6.00 P/P ⛔ Read hover note.
[1]: When reviewing applications, the campaign manager pays attention to many details, including; how informative and organic your posts are, for what and how often you get merit, do you have a customized trust list and do you use a feedback system. A sig campaign is an “ad” for the customer and a “hobby” for the participants, so the manager will definitely pay attention to whether you have shown interest in previously promoted projects. The above points are a sure way to understand whether you will be useful for promoting a particular project or service.
Looks like Icopress is being more innovative as wellJump to: