Topic: Only Administer Theymos And Cyrus Please see my post (Read 321 times)

-Not relevant here-


A lot of people have been harping on the Sig campaigns thing. Here are a couple of things:

Q1. Why do companies have Sign Campaigns?

A. To
    (a.) To grab eyeballs so that people know about them and invest or use those services.
    (b.) To pay posters who make good posts on BCT.

I think it's the (a.). (Correct me if I'm wrong or have a wrong notion anywhere in this post.)

Q2. Do people make decisions to invest in ICO or use a service based on the Sign Holders?
A. I've seen people wear the Signature of a Mixer, I have looked into the service and it looks AWESOME. I wouldn't care if a racist half-wit is wearing that signature and spamming endlessly (actually someone racist is wearing it), I have and will use the service.

I've also seen many good posters wear the sign of a Mining company and I have looked into it again, will I invest, HELL NO!

Q3. What's the use of merits and such regulations then?
A. I hate to say it, but the winners are ICO Bounties that need to pay less (Sorry Satoshi, but Centralized Institutions are winning), because people won't rank up. I think the only useful system is the TRUST, that too when u are trading and not proselytizing your political opinions. As for rest, all Ranks and Merits should be abolished and each Bounty Manager shud be made to count posts and assess the quality and pay for them. ICOs are happy to have 100 Jr. Members Shit-Post and say Good Project while grabbing attention to their projects, because that also is a form of marketing. Why do the PAUL BROTHERS and their gangs have Millions of views when all they make is SHIT, because even cringe is appealing and makes for good marketing.

Q4. What's my proposed solution?
A. Read the BOLD part up.
EDIT : Initiatives such as SMAS list by Lauda is a good reference point and I applaud them, although I'm on the list (Rightly so!) and believe that it has little utility in terms of marketing. (Again grabbing eye-balls is more important !)


My 2cents : All of us can agree that Sign campaigns pay well, but do they pay to make good posts or to grab eyeballs. If it was to make good posts, add that in Article Bounties. I hope someone points out valid loopholes and assumptions that I made.

Thanks.


P.S. Can some marketing veteran point it out that my logic has fallacies, but remember that most investors in ICOs are extremely clueless and not a reformed crowd that they would care for quality of adverts or advertisers. We also have instances in the past to prove it. MIOTA raised a small seed on forum and was being called a SCAM all the time. The marketing was shit, but most of us can agree that the project is doing good today.

For the time being, the best solution up till now is removing the signature space from the Junior Member to the Newbie rank, or adding a merit requirement to be a Junior Member

Yeah it is kinda unrealistic, but imagine if the caliber of all manager is like DarkStar_ , Yahoo62278, Lutpin, Lauda, and all other excellent managers.

I'm not sure how we could go about this. I guess, only allowing copper members from making a bounty thread? Again, they won't care for paying a small fee, because the bounties generate a lot of noise for their project, and they end up profiting from it anyway. So, I'm not sure what the best option would be.

For the time being, the best solution up till now is removing the signature space from the Junior Member to the Newbie rank, or adding a merit requirement to be a Junior Member like what has been talked in the hillariousandco's thread, and (not) surprisingly, many members backed up the suggestion because all think that it is the right thing to do for now. Well, members can only dreaming and still it is the admin that can bring that things up for this forum.

Another solution can be made from managers side. They need to do the job right like checking the spamming of their workers, making a list of spammer, or adding some merit requirement to be on their campaign.

In the perfect world; It would be nice to have those sorts of managers managing the bounty sections, but yeah I think its pretty unrealistic. I doubt many of those managers would be willing to deal with tokens/shares either.

I'm not sure how we could go about this. I guess, only allowing copper members from making a bounty thread? Again, they won't care for paying a small fee, because the bounties generate a lot of noise for their project, and they end up profiting from it anyway. So, I'm not sure what the best option would be. Maybe, only allowing a certain few trustworthy members, but that leads to centralization, and I'm not sure whether that would be welcomed around here.

Another solution can be made from managers side. They need to do the job right like checking the spamming of their workers, making a list of spammer, or adding some merit requirement to be on their campaign.