If anyone sees this please read this and share your opinion:
I'm toying around with the idea of having a set group of people who I've personally deemed are high quality posters to continue to get paid per post count and branching off the campaign to allow anyone to join on and off instantly and use a PD3 referral link which will automatically credit their account (I'd likely boost the referral rate to something like 20%+ for those not being paid per post)
I'm confident doing this would greatly cut down on forum spam, while the very high quality posters who I select would have the option to continue the campaign as it exists privately or swap to a referral based payment.
This isn't at all decided, so feel free to weigh in.
My opinion: The spam of a few members is really awful. They use this campaign as a replacement for a regular work. I have no idea how anyone can post +10 constructive and informative postings per day. I think it would be much healthier to decrease the maximum number of valid posts per month depending in what user group you are. Personally, i can't stand to read these unproductive one-liners anymore.
Just an example:
Members: Payout for 50 posts per month (50 is also the minimum)
Full Members: Payout for a maximum of 100 posts per month
Sr Members: Payout for a maximum of 200 posts per month (to be honest, i witness the bad spam behaviour only from members and full members..)
Hero Member: Payout for a maximum of 400 posts per month (no change - usually good quality)
I think that would be a much more healthier approach to the spam problem.
Personally, when i browse through the history of a few full members that are involved in this campaign, i really feel(and read) how hard they are trying to make their daily post count(+10) on a daily base. From a reader's point of view their postings look like work, that they don't enjoy. That is why the quality lacks big time. A reduction of the maximum valid posts would help to increase the quality imho.
