We cannot say that a bad bounty manager is the one who gives access to red trust owners to be able to join the campaign.
It could be that the red trust is better at promoting a campaign than you. I think a bounty manager like this always thinks positively which he believes that the possibility is always there even in negative things. And that is not a mistake.
Topic: Red trust accounts wearing signature..... - page 5. (Read 1280 times)
Red trust wearing signature code is soley at the discretion of the bounty manger. Some manager will specifically emphasise on the rule that Bitcointalk account with red trust are not allowed to wear signature code and participate in his bounty while some managers permits red trusted Bitcointalk accounts to participate, so in all the bounty manager has the final say of whether to allow red trust account participate in the bounty or not. Some bounty managers also take out time to verify the cause of the red trust before allowing such participants to participate in the bounty campaign
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
Uhm, it's not that common for bounty managers accepting red trust users. But some are okay with them. It might be the rules made from bounty manager and the project team themselves. Although some also not accept red trust users since they want a healthty bounty participants to not spamming the forum and all. But it doesnt change the overall bounty. But I do think that bounty manager needs to give them a fair warning. As to not spamming, using alt accounts etc.I don't see any reason no to accept them too, we should give chance for as long as they are just using 1 account in one campaign, as long as they are not scammers, so it will be fine at all. Giving chance to everybody should be a must here, we are one big family, let's give chance to correct each other, once he committed crime or he did the same thing again then that's the time not to give chance at all.
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
if your joining bounty campaign with negative trust BM check the profile first where the feedback came from and what are their references, what i mean if its true or not because for your information there are some user making false accusations with other BM. So don't judge them if you have no such information why they owned negative trust. In fact owner of the project will not let bm with negative trust to handle it if it's true that they are not trustworthy member of btt, unless if the BM is the real owner of the scam project . Lol 
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
Uhm, it's not that common for bounty managers accepting red trust users. But some are okay with them. It might be the rules made from bounty manager and the project team themselves. Although some also not accept red trust users since they want a healthty bounty participants to not spamming the forum and all. But it doesnt change the overall bounty. But I do think that bounty manager needs to give them a fair warning. As to not spamming, using alt accounts etc. 
Its not really an issue unless it is stated that they are prohibited. Campaign managers compose their own set of rules when conducting a bounty, they can change the rules as well. If it bothers you that they accept negative trusted members then you have the freedom to opt out of the bounty otherwise just deal with it.
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
so what is your real goal ??
Do you feel jealous of rules like this ??
I personally will not mind things like this because everyone has the right to follow the bounty while he can follow the rules.
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
It's not normal but we can't interfere with a bounty manager's decision if he/she decided to accept participants with red trust rating. I don't think that kind of scenario were included in this forum's general rules. On the other hand, a bounty manager can be also tagged if he/she tolerate it because he/she can be considered as encouraging spam or whatsoever. 
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
Actually this is common sense. Well E3t could exempt it since there is no mentioned in the rules not allowing red trust participants. But some manager, really accept red trust like, campaign handled by Jolin,who known to be good on handling projects. For me, its actually not good to allow them since they have been tagged for some negative feedback.
Prohibiting the users with red-trust to join in the bounty is a good point and it will make the bounty to be better.
However, some bounty managers may not consider the trust, they only focus on how many people that can participate and help them promote their projects. It is no matter, however, in my opinion, you will be better to be more selective in choosing or making rules for bounty campaigns.
However, some bounty managers may not consider the trust, they only focus on how many people that can participate and help them promote their projects. It is no matter, however, in my opinion, you will be better to be more selective in choosing or making rules for bounty campaigns.
I at all not see nothing bad in is, that participants with negative trust will promote what the project. And I will not be alarmed by it. I evaluate the project on other qualities and the fact that they can accept red participants means absolutely nothing.
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
Red trust rule is basically a sign of warning to the Bitcointalk public that the individual behind the account might have some questionable character and should be dealt with in care. Its now the user perogative in this case, the bounty manager, to decide what to do with the information. The bounty manager may not be good or bad but he may just be careless one.
Many bounty managers do not allow participants with negative trust to participate and I think this is the right decision. I prefer to participate only in such projects.
Such bounties have existed for a long time, and this does not determine whether BM is good or bad. Obviously, for somebody red trust is nothing. If you are hesitant to participate, it is best not to participate. Factors like this are not the way to evaluate bounty. Firstly you investigate the project, and if it is good, there is no problem joining the bounty. Members already work separately.
You are right. that is because there are various reasons why it was given neg trust. and even then the assessment is quite subjective which sometimes for some people it is not a problem. and I would say it's normal. BM with negative trust does not mean she/he is a bad person, and it does not mean that all BMs with neg trust allow participants with neg trust join bounties. if the OP is disturbed by it and worried about having an unpleasant experience with a BM like that, then just leave it, if I have no problem, as long as the project is good and the performance of the bounty manager is quite professional. Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
Maybe such bounty manager are considering the fact that some people with red trust have repented themselves over that they had do. Besides such people who have been marked like that doesn't mean that their journey will end. In addition they are an addition for campaign to grow. Maybe as well they make more quality post, fulfilling ideas other than those people who have not a red trust. On the other hand there are no problem adding people with red trust although it is bad for the image of the campaign itself for allowing such people. 
Given the fact that some Trustees of the forum can paint a person's trust just like that, without objective reasons, then I would not pay attention to it. Of course, most people get negative trust deservedly, but this cant be the main reason that would prove the incompetence of the bounty manager.
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
I think it's normal since It's depend on the team who choose the bounty manager. Then, the bounty manager create the rules. But i think it will be bad if the red trust join the bounty campaigns. Most of them got negative trust because of creating multi accounts. So maybe they will abuse the bounty too.
I don't think that if a bounty manager allows participants with negative trust to participate, then he is a bad manager. I have an example of a project that is quite successful now, but in a bounty company they accepted participants with red trust. So I don't think it's a bad thing.
Presently i detect that few bounties still allow red trust accounts to wear their signatures, i think this means the bounty project is been managed by bad bounty manager or what do you think? for example E3T bounty allows red trust account, is this normal ?
Such bounties have existed for a long time, and this does not determine whether BM is good or bad. Obviously, for somebody red trust is nothing. If you are hesitant to participate, it is best not to participate. Factors like this are not the way to evaluate bounty. Firstly you investigate the project, and if it is good, there is no problem joining the bounty. Members already work separately.
Most bounty managers don't care who is participating in their bounties, nor do they have any interest in the quality of the posts participants make.
As far as I've seen, most bounty hunters only care about one thing: getting as many bounty hunters to join as possible.
In any case, I wouldn't say that allowing negged hunters to join is a big problem, so long as they're not multi-accounters then it should be fine.
As far as I've seen, most bounty hunters only care about one thing: getting as many bounty hunters to join as possible.
In any case, I wouldn't say that allowing negged hunters to join is a big problem, so long as they're not multi-accounters then it should be fine.
Jump to: