Topic: Red Trusted Managers Don't Accept Red Trusted Participants - page 5. (Read 815 times)
That is privacy for dev team to choose who will be manager.and how about their rules.but for me i just choose bounty program that manager handling hvnt red trust and popular manager at bounty program..very important if we choose that have high rank on bitcointalk forum.i think is ok for choose high rank BM on bounty program
What I see is that most managers who have red trust are new managers on the grounds that the campaigns they manage are not in accordance with predetermined rules, and there are also managers who don't pay participants and various other reasons that I think are managers like that deserves red trust because it harms participants who really work well.
You simply compare the participant with a negative trust and the participant is different things managers usually get a red trust from dissatisfied participants and participants for fraudulent actions so everything is fair.
It's their choice, you can't force them to accept negative ttust users. I think people don't have a look or barely look at a signature of negative trust users. I personally too wouldn't accept negative trusted user.
For sure it is unfair, I cannot get such bounty managers, because if you have a red trusted account, you should take part in bounties held by a manager that has a red trusted account as well. Otherwise it does not make sense for me at all.
No matter how you guys discuss is, at the end of the day it will still be the project owners who will decide if they hire those bounty managers. For bounty hunters having a red trust is up to the decision of the bounty manager and the project owner so I don't think bounty hunters will have rights to complain. I those people are the ones using their account so it's due to their actions which got themselves having a red trust. And there is always a way to bring the trust rating back to green by doing good deeds or proving something.
For sure it is unfair, I cannot get such bounty managers, because if you have a red trusted account, you should take part in bounties held by a manager that has a red trusted account as well. Otherwise it does not make sense for me at all.
This is a stupid paradox, but it has a place to be.
After all, the bounty is configured not only by the manager himself, but also by the ICO managers, as they say - this is what the manager should do.
After all, the bounty is configured not only by the manager himself, but also by the ICO managers, as they say - this is what the manager should do.
Isn't it unfair?
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
It is fair for the bitcointalk community. Most of the red trust participants are alt accounts and that is unfair. Even if the bounty manager's reputation is bad he/she doesn't tolerate those red trust participants to abuse the forum and I think that's better.
"Guiding others to a treasure the red trust bounty manager cannot possess."
Isn't it unfair?
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
This might occur due to an agreement from the manager and the ico team. but indeed things like this cannot be protested too far because we are only participants. if indeed you cannot follow these rules then you can leave the projeck.Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
This is the basic problem with bounty campaigns. There are too many bounty hunters around and they have hardly any bargaining power. The team can change the rules whenever they want and no one is going to say anything. If they are not interested in hiring a good bounty manager, then that is the first sign that something shady is present.
Isn't it unfair?
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
This might occur due to an agreement from the manager and the ico team. but indeed things like this cannot be protested too far because we are only participants. if indeed you cannot follow these rules then you can leave the projeck. Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
Managers can get red trust for different reasons for example managing a campaign which does not pay the hunters or turn out to be a scam. It can happen to each manager even if they do deep research on the project. It does not mean that he is not capable to run other campaigns successfully.
I haven't seen any campaign manager that has a negative trust on their account, so can you give me an example of a campaign manager that has negative trust who don't want to accept participants with negative trust, the only way that could be possible is if the negative trust was given to the manager during the campaign which his contract has to be terminated before is contract as a campaign manager seizes, because no one will be interested in hiring a manager with negative trust.
Isn't it unfair?
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
Nowadays it has become very common for the bounty managers to get red trust pasted on them by the DT members. Most of the times it is due to their own fault. After starting the campaign, many of these managers go AWOL for many weeks without any prior intimation. Sometimes they keep the spreadsheets not updated for long durations. Because of these factors, it is very difficult to find a campaign manager who has neutral trust.
There are some with green trust (such as yahoo62278), but they are expensive. And since the ICOs basically want the services from bounty hunters and bounty managers for free, they may not be interested in paying such managers.
Yes they don’t
Neither do they accept newbies
It is one of bounty trivial that cannot be avoided but it’s still best to avoid any complicating
But check bounty terms before joining; saves us some strength
Neither do they accept newbies
It is one of bounty trivial that cannot be avoided but it’s still best to avoid any complicating
But check bounty terms before joining; saves us some strength
Isn't it unfair?
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
All managers have different rules and you just need to follow them, they are having a red trust for many reasons, well they trust for that manager even if they having a red trust because they believe that their platform would be successful and specially if that bounty manager has a big community then it was a big impact on their platform. Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
Hahaha.. This is just funny. It's just like a thief making noise or lamenting when he is stolen from. It's a shame if there are managers that do this.
Good simile, friend. I agree with you, this is really funny. However, because of this, many bounty hunters lose their jobs. 
Isn't it unfair?
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
Lol, someone is looking for some people’s trouble. Should we call that a misplaced priority, if they don’t get to be judge by their own red trust, I see no reason why they should judge other accounts too based on them. They need to remove the stone in their own eyes first before removing the one in another man’s eyes.Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign. If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
Anyway, they are simply using their position the way they like it since they feel they worked hard for it, so for people that are yet to get to that stage, all we need to do if try as much as possible to at the top too where we can control things and make things right. It is only when you are at the top and show a good example that others will follow too.
Most of the bounty managers has red trust but they never accept red trusted participants mostly on their signature campaign.
It is on manager's discretion, you don't have a say on this
. Fact wise, many member here avoid managers with red trusts issue for the fact that most of their handled campaign either scam the participants or the manager themselves are manipulating the spreadsheet for their own benefits.
If ico making this decision so why are they hiring a red trusted manager?
Most ICO project does not know Bitcointalk so they do not know about the trust rating here.
Isn't it unfair?
Is life fair?
Nice post, I'm confused as well but since I can't find the answer I decide not to join any bounties from bounty managers with red trust because I don't trust them ,even if they pay bounty rewards they will cheat, that's why they have redtrust in the first place
People can get redtrusts for various reasons. Promoting scam projects, cheating bounty, etc.
In my opinion, a project is okay to hire a redtrust managers as long as the redtrust is not related to bounty campaigns. A redtrust managers that don't accepted redtrust bounty hunters must be because the bounty hunters has been bumped for cheating bounty or anyting bad regarding bounty campaigns. If not, then it's nonsense.
I agree most people didn't get the red trust because of the bounty Scam , but it wasn't fair to me either , and I don't see why that's the case , maybe things will change in the future In my opinion, a project is okay to hire a redtrust managers as long as the redtrust is not related to bounty campaigns. A redtrust managers that don't accepted redtrust bounty hunters must be because the bounty hunters has been bumped for cheating bounty or anyting bad regarding bounty campaigns. If not, then it's nonsense.
Jump to: