Topic: September/October signature campaign season? (Read 488 times)

My mind is quite simple this year has been flooded with signature campaigns compared to the years that have passed, the reason is only one "Covid-19 pandemic" this is the main factor.

With limited human activity, the best option that people around the world can make is to play games, so that entrepreneurs / companies and the public can make money through gambling or gaming.

For that an alternative that can be done on the internet is to promote certain site game service ads on this forum, through a signature campaign.
So it happens like now 90% of signature campaigns advertise gambling sites.

I guess it is just a coincidience that we are seeing much more campaigns in these months rather than a defined pattern lol. The market is rising, people are in homes and are bored so this is also a great opportunity for new casinos to come online and make money and hence we are seeing an uproar of them and they need ads so the uprising in signature campaigns as well. This is a good time as well for everyone to earn some money by participating in them.

Immediately changing ( decreasing) the pay rate when they see constant increase in the bitcoin price is just normal practice of signature campaigns in the past few years, only few campaigns managed to pay what they are paying in their beginning whether it is fixed in BTC or fiat. Normally people don't care if the pay rate gets decreased but its not really looks like a fair practice by the management.

I don't know exactly how campaign managers work, but I think setting up pay rates is combination of their recommendation and the client budget. It makes sense that if you plan to have signature campaign for a longer period of time to pay more than average in order to attract more quality members that will make signature campaign more successful and I hope that managers are suggesting exactly that.

When I look at those long term campaigns (CM, Yolo, Bustadice, Sportsbet,Crypto.Games etc) that are going on for years, all of them (well with the exception of Bitvest and 777Coin) pay more than average so hopefully others that plan long term will choose that approach too. As a matter of fact, the one I'm currently part of, BestChange, did exactly that. They cut down number of participants significantly and increased pay rates, in order to attract/keep better posters.


Regarding quality of content, what I would like to see is managers doing those "cleanups" more often, and removing not only those that don't meet post quota, but also those that don't meet the certain standards. People tend to get a bit lazy if they see that they are safe as long as they meet the weekly quota so maybe even unconsciously they lower post quality.


Yeah I know that people tend to look at past through rose tinted glasses, that's why I was curious about that. It makes sense though that campaigns from 3-4 years ago were great in the amount of BTC payed out, since BTC was much lower back then, so maybe that makes people think of that, they remember all those big BTC payouts week after week.

I think that it may be related to the rise of Bitcoin price in the last months and the expectations for even higher prices.
High / rising price for Bitcoin means that Bitcoiners' "wealth" worth more in fiat and they may spend more. Also means that more trader wannabes are coming into the ecosystem.
This means that it's a good time to make the service more visible, hence more signature campaigns.

And on volatility and USD payments... obviously they try to get maximum exposure with minimum effort (money). And since Bitcoin is on the rise, fixed prices in USD can easily save some bucks.


Chipmixer is an exception. A great one. It's not only the better pay with rates kept from the beginning (in Bitcoin), it also has no minimum post count. It's also something from the past and I don't think that there's another campaign "alive" with no minimum.

Volatility? I remember watching a few campaigns that kept chopping and changing the BTC pay rate as the price rose and everyone whining like mad about it. Sometimes it followed it closely, other times it was an excuse to pay much less.

I'd do the same thing most likely. Starting off with a fiat equivalent saves a lot of ball ache and moaning. Maybe the majority have learnt their lesson.

I was also a member of the Bitmixer signature campaign, but only when Lauda took it over from the bot (yes the campaign was without a manager), and pay rate was 0.0007 BTC per post (max. 0.035BTC/week), and since time line is end of October 2016 price of BTC was around $700. So the maximum you could get was about $25 a week, but when we look at the payout in BTC it's almost identical to what CM pays today, with the difference that CM has kept its pay rate in BTC until today, while no one else is even close to following it - but because of that they do not achieve good results. No campaign that lasts 2-4 weeks, which pays very poorly, can not expect a good promotion, that is a fact.

off topic: i wonder why there are so many sig campaigns with fixed payments in fiat rather than btc. Back in the day (1 or 2 years ago?) seeing pay rates in fiat was considered a novelty on the forum, not it's the norm

Yes, I saw many slots open for the moment and this is the  best time for other users to join signature bounty that pays btc.

Surely this will not happen everyday and for those who were not able to notice this then this will be the very good chance and opportunity to earn. It may not be that enough but at least an this is consider as an easy job that could earn and at the same time to learn projects related to cryptocurrency.

I think nostalgia is getting the better of people.

In fiat terms Chipmixer is vastly more than any other I can remember. I was in the bitmixer campaign, which paid out in BTC and never changed the amount too, and that was $10-15 a week for a long time.

Another one was Coinsbank which was effectively unlimited in how much you could post and my best haul was about $50 in a week.

There've been a handful of fiat denominated campaigns that paid over $100 a week to heavyweights but they were few in number.

The criteria have dropped significantly whether some want to admit it or not, and a larger number of signature campaigns only means that the opportunity must be given to those who would not otherwise have a chance - because slots must be filled.


It’s true that campaigns used to pay much higher amounts a few years ago, and then those amounts got smaller and smaller - and as far as I can see the main role in that is played by campaign managers because they probably suggest to the advertiser what pay rates to set, and each advertiser will refer to those prices that have already been set, because why pay a Hero/Legendary member $100 per week, if all campaigns pay $40- $60 for the same thing. If a common position of all managers would be created that prices must go up, and that this must be accompanied by the quality of content, I believe that advertisers would agree to the new conditions.

---

What about those who post 2 lines, or those who write nonsense without reading anything but the OP and the title (like the example I posted)? Not only these have become acceptable, but they get bonuses for their posts...

I've only just this week joined my first signature campaign. I would've joined one much sooner but there was hardly any opportunities for Member level accounts to join anything. I see this as an overall positive because now I don't have to look for scammy shitcoin bounties and it might encourage bounty hunters to level up since the requirements to reach Member are not that difficult and the incentives are better.

There was very little campaign in 2019 because of the bear market. Market had spike in April of 2019 but at that period there are not many people believed the market already found its bottom. The growth of signature campaign did not rise well until early of 2020 and I believe that the DeFi hype and the crazy bull market shed a light for companies.

To run big campaigns and long-live, companies need to have big funds and they obviously are big companies. With positive results from campaign back to their companies are a must criterion.

Shitposters can not join any good campaigns today with one line posts. The ugly style is shitposters try to make their posts look informative by sketching it with non-sense vocabularies and grammar is broken. They don't know how to make succinct posts and don't want to try it.

History - signature campaigns and bounties on Bitcointalk
Signature campaign stats: users, bans, posts, deleted posts
I know one topic that lists all signature campaigns on the forum but don't remember the title and I can not find it with Search.

Actually this is my second campaign and before I got the second one it takes a lot of weeks before it open, and on my prediction on the early times before I made into a full member rank it takes over a few months before they are launching another big campaign, and now by this few months there are a lot of campaigns starts, I think the one factor to is the increase of the bitcoin price just IMO. Also, it's a good reflection of our forum it gives a good market promotion to their platform.

The more the campaign, the more our effectivity to our forum.

Whenever the price of bitcoin starts to increase, the number of campaigns are also getting increased as far as my observation since I am existence here.In 2018 there were no campaigns and in 2019 there are very less campaigns in the time period you mentioned.

More signature campaigns are sign of adoption in my opinion and now the adoption of crypto casinos are happening.

There are quality posters in campaigns that are paying up to 50 USD/week, even Legendary members who due various reasons ended up in one of those lesser paid campaigns. Problem is that there  are only few campaigns around that are paying more than that, and spots there open very rarely, and when they do, competition is tough and it ain't easy to get in, especially if you don't have shit load of merit earned in 120 days, as that is a big factor. In the end, 50 USD per week for some posting is not a bad pocket money, even in Europe and not only in 3rd world countries, so why not join if you gonna write on the forum anyway. Only problem is lack of good members to fill all those spots, so signature campaigns are slowly getting filled with subpar posters.


He referred to March 2020, and he is right. Just around that time I've started following signature campaigns more closely and I remember it being much harder than now to join any campaign.

I do remember there was a dearth of campaigns for quite a while, and I actually started wondering whether the entire concept of the signature campaign was going to die off.  I assume when you say March you're referring to March 2019, right?  I can't remember what the price of bitcoin was back then, but the ICO craze had worn off and IIRC there was just a general lack of enthusiasm around that time period.

And now here we are in 2020 and bitcoin is starting to boom again.  There might be some sort of correlation between bitcoin's price and the number of campaigns/bounties, but I'm just thinking out loud and have no data to support this.  What I do know is that enthusiasm for bitcoin and all things crypto has been growing for months now, so it's probably a time when crypto businesses would be more profitable and therefore more of them are being created and advertised via sig campaigns.

Yeah, that's kind of always been the problem except maybe back in 2016-17 when there were so many campaigns that most of them were filled with wall-to-wall shitposters.  Oh, how I love the merit system and what it's done.

A member who can make quality posts in English probably wouldn't be interested in a campaign paying that little, but $30-50 per week is a decent amount of money in a lot of countries where English is rarely spoken.  It's the garbage shitposters who are heavily motivated by that kind of money.

 

Probably they launched these days because they have already profited and do have a budget to pay for an advertising campaign. And it's about to shoot the bullrun.
Most of the campaigns are paying like $35-$50 per week in BTC may actually pay a little low in soon compare to the ones who are paying 0.0001BTC per post because of this bullrun. There are fewer projects today that are doing campaigns too

It might be for several reasons it could be due to the bitcoin bullrun factor, it could also be because the advertising on this forum brings benefits to the platform itself that does the signature campaign, even I don't underestimate if a promotion project on this forum is better with a lot the interests of the users of this forum are the many.

The service now has a signature campaign that means they reopen with the opportunities that have been prepared.

So this will be the most at the end of this year.

I agree with Little Mouse. This has some relation with the price. I remember after the crash of BTC from 2017, in 2018, there were very few projects with signature campaign. Most were running long time and it was hard to get a place there. I barely have seen couple of signature projects to come within a month which now has been a lot.
Due to the price increase in BTC, it gets easier to pay $100 per week if you are in a BTC business. But when the price crashes, it will cost huge in term of BTC.