Topic: [PrimeDice] (Staff Only) Earn Bitcoins Simply By Posting - page 33. (Read 595266 times)

I personally prefer the fixed rate deals for numerous reasons, especially if the per post is going to be a mere 0.0006 per post.


Why should posts in the off-topic section not be counted? I also don't see how it would be feasable for whoiever is running this campaign to deduct them. It would be a nightmare. The pay scheme changing with the amount of posts you do would also further complicate things for everyone. Just either do a simple pay per post or fixed rate.

This is very good analysis. One thing that should be remembered however is that there is essentially zero competition for advertisers. There are not any pay per post signature campaigns for senior (or above) accounts period right now. The two campaigns that are open to additional members and have a post requirement (fortunejack and PRCDice.eu both effectively pay .001 per post if you post the exact number of posts required. They are both pretty good for active posters however they also force you to post in a very even manner as they payout once per week and do not allow posts to carry over (if you are one post short you are out of luck and kicked out of the campaign). There are several that pay effectively .002 per post (paying exactly 50 posts) however they are almost always full. If Stunna hadn't have been right about dicebitco.in scamming then things might be a little different as they would probably still be in the signature campaign market, but even the last time they opened up their campaign they were able to fill 100 spots within ~36 hours or so.

I agree that there should be very clear, specific rules as to what posts will be paid and which posts will not be paid (I don't see any reason why users can't post in the off topic section for example, as long as they understand they will not be paid for such posts). You should have multiple people (it would probably be too large a job for just one person) check users' post throughout the month and keep track of how many "payable" posts they have made (this would also eliminate the logistical issue of receiving 100's of PM's around the same time each month trying to get everyone paid) every day or every week, allowing for payments to be made automatically.

As for payment structure I might suggest, say a flat rate of .05 for the first 50 posts, then an additional .02375 for at least 75 posts total, then an additional .045 for at least 125 posts total, then an additional .0008 for each post above 125 posts. This would give users a disincentive to spam as they get a less amount on a per post basis after each threshold is met.

In the above example: posts
1 - 50 would be paid an effective rate of .001 per post
51 - 75 would be paid an effective rate of .00095 per post
76 - 125 would be paid an effective rate of .009 per post
126+ would be paid a rate of .008

If you wanted to pay higher levels more then you could add say 20% to hero members, and 25% to legendary/staff members.

I think this scheme (or a similar scheme) would allow you to remain competitive with other advertisers, as the rate for the first 50 posts is on par with the competition, while allowing/encouraging members to post more then only 50 posts, giving you a maximum level of exposure, while also not breaking your advertising budget.

Exactly...the signature campaigns can easy lower market rates for signatures. I think they should agree to cap @ 50 posts per month. This is the campaign owners market, not the people who joins it.

Agree.

It looks as if some posters here are trying to come up with complicated sets of rules to fit what they would like to get paid. For this new sig campaign to be successful it needs to fit Stunna's and PD's needs, not ours. Less complication, less spam, everybody wins. It's not a job, it's just an ad in your signature.

400 a month is a horrible idea...75% of people with sigs just post to get paid. PD can set a low fixed rate for 50 posts a month and it will fill. The spam has gone quite a bit since this stopped...hope we keep it that way.

I'm still thinking that the 400 post  at month it is a good choice , maybe at the rate if 0.0006BTC for the Sr. and 0.0007BTC  for the Hero/Legendary or maybe put again the unlimited post at month  but not for the rank under the Sr. Member ( but with a low pay-rate and before check the last posts for each member).

I would like to see at least a fixed rate of 0.2 / 200 = 0.001 per post under the old rules for people who would like a fixed system then for those that want the per post rate the 0.0006 could be applied.

It would be interesting since it would be a testing ground to see how much bloat versus productive posts there are
Some months are a lot more interesting than others in Bitcoin and those are the ones where a lot of stuff tends to go down
^_^
The Canadian Regulators were what I thought was interesting this month myself and mintpal...

As for The rate of Pay Per Post

At 200 that is 0.12 BTC so its 4X the amount of posting to pass B/E (break even) than Greencoin which I am in which has a 50/mo rate but its a bit of an unusual one in that sense since it was upfront and is 0.02 above the baseline of pretty much everyone else which uses 0.1.

It would have been double the work of pocket dice with 25 posts CAP or 0.03/week making it effectively the same
Only you would need to only do 100 posts but the campaign just closed.

Where it would be attractive at is an average over 200 posts a month or 6.6 posts a day in the forum pretty reasonable not much of a wide range from there, other wise a standby at 50 posts a month for 0.1 would be more attractive.

I guess at around 2 X to 3X the work/ads of a fixed post campaign
The rates would begin to be more attractive at 4X it might be a bit too much work for the effort.

That puts the rate at around 0.0007-0.001/post. (Or I guess upper limit at old Senior Rate)

50 = 0.1 Fixed
@ 0.0006/Post
166 Posts = 0.1
3.32 X The Work of a fixed at 50 rate

50 = 0.1 Fixed
@ 0.0007/Post
142 Posts = 0.1
2.84 X The work of a fixed at 50 rate

50 = 0.1 Fixed
@0.0008/Post
100 = 0.08 So 125 posts would = 0.1 still leaving an upside that H@C maybe Micro etc can monitor while still being an effective checkpoint.
2.5 Times the Work to get a rate higher than the fixed rate.  

@ 0.0009/ Post that is 2.2 X the work
111= 0.1

@ 0.001
2X the work
100 = 0.1
50 = 0.1 Fixed


Looking at the range anywhere between 2X to 3X thats between 0.0007 per post to 0.001 makes it attractive in a relative scale
I think 2.5X seems like a good standby point myself but its just one metric so lets others discuss it further.

Offering two types of systems is also a possibility as moneypot runs two models allowing people a Choice instead of choosing one system or another.
The fixed is a lower rate that the pay per post maximum is but also requires less posting so a balance can be maintained.
That said its still the most competitive one for full members presently at pay per post.
To outmode that for Full Members a cap of 100 + 1 would win that ranking tier.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/moneypot-signature-campaign-february-is-open-767639

MoreBloodWine's idea of a hybrid system is interesting.  Imagine you offer a flat rate for at least X posts.  Say 0.09BTC for at least 50 high quality posts.  But you say, ok, for folks who post a lot more (obviously with the spam controls you mentioned), then you offer a plan like 0.0006 per post with no limit.

Is that crazy?

I dont mind a unlimited pay per post rate but under old rules I never really topped 0.2 BTC which was around 200 posts.

Would you also consider a flat rate for people who chose to accept such a rate if they feel they could post a good bit as before but maybe not enough to make it interesting under the scale you posted / I quoted ?

At the beginning, the limit of 400 posts/month was not there. That was implemented later. 

Well this is a good time to restart as pocketdice just folded up their campaign.

Maybe you should start by inviting a few users.  Look through the threads and see who makes good posts not just spams the hell out of the boards.  Would control costs and give better value for your coins.

Or maybe return at the beginning , no fixed rate and a limit of 400 post/month ( It's only a personal opinion). Before check the  last posts/general statistics for each member.

I would suggest that you go with the fixed rates.

If that was the case I think even fewer people would join as you would be far better of sticking with a fixed rate deal. Whatever happens their should be some sort of cap as some people will go crazy.

Maybe it is a good idea to put a limit of 200 post/month at the rate 0.0006/post for Sr.    and 0.0007/post for Hero/Legendary.

I don't think having an unlimited amount of posts is going to be a good idea if you want to cut down spam, though limiting it to Seniors and above would be wise. I personally would prefer a fixed rate deal if the posts are going to be at such a relatively low payment. I get 0.1 for 50 posts as do many others and on this deal I would have to do 167 posts to get the same so it wouldn't be worth it for me and I'm sure many others would agree.

Yes, of course. Consider that if you insert an high payment on your fixed signature campaign, there will be possibility to rout competitor.

Fixed rate. Less incentive for spam, less policing, easier for you to manage the campaign, easier for members to verify that they are getting paid fairly. Is there really any disadvantage to that other than some members thinking they'd make more money on PPP basis?

In this way is true that everyone can earn a lot of bitcoin at the end of month, but there will be so much spam. Fixed rate is better than pay per post in way that everyone earn x to post y, not more.