Topic: Should we limit members in one campaign? - page 2. (Read 1560 times)
I think members shouldn't be limited because everyone has a right to participate every campaign. I may join a bounty in the last week and earning one stake with my participation. Also bounty owners want more people to advertise their project.
I consider that the number of participants of a bounty needs to be limited. That's because of a large number of participants, rewards are too small. Of course for bounty campaigns it is perhaps not the really good idea as advertizing extends the smaller number of participants. But efficiency of such advertizing, unfortunately, low. All this because of a large number of bots, fake accounts and etc. But if to raise requirements to quality of accounts of participants, then the advertizing efficiency will increase.
Dear all,
Sorry for any inconvenience for this topic,
I’ve ever joined some bounty campaigns and get some tokens. Bellow are my thinking:
There are some projects attract so much participants, although that means the project is very interesting but it has limited bonus. Result, bonus that each participant receivers from the campaign very small. A lot of participants in one campaign has made so many spams on social networking….
So a question here: Should we limit members in one campaign?
(maybe depend on the bonus value of that campaign)
What are your thinking?
Please share…
The problem with bounty campaigns with too many participants is the bounty payout will be small and it's not good for the low tier participants. Because they can get the small percentage of the pool. Although it's good for the project to have many hunters advertise their project or product. But in exchange is the low bounty payout when it doesn't do any justice. When you worked more than 12 weeks and got only a less than $10 worth of tokens. And it's very disappointing. Sorry for any inconvenience for this topic,
I’ve ever joined some bounty campaigns and get some tokens. Bellow are my thinking:
There are some projects attract so much participants, although that means the project is very interesting but it has limited bonus. Result, bonus that each participant receivers from the campaign very small. A lot of participants in one campaign has made so many spams on social networking….
So a question here: Should we limit members in one campaign?
(maybe depend on the bonus value of that campaign)
What are your thinking?
Please share…
Have you seen the table of bounty programs of the TokenSuite team? There are no restrictions and they are packed with a huge number of bots and scams, duplicating data with incorrect purse addresses. This command fills the table very well, but they need to limit the number of participants.
Yes, I hope that in the future they reconsider and have new rules to limits the number of participants. But I'm afraid that it's too hard for that thing happend because they need the a huge nuber of member for advertisement.
having a large number of participants is good because they are aiming for a posible wide exposure around the forum and there is no problem with that at all as long as they are not scamming their participants . they should also restrict their rules in order to avoid cheater and spammers to roam around the forum .
there is no need to limit the campaign participants because all of the users here do always want to be apart of the campaign but the problem is that there arent any new campaigns lately . some campaigns nowadays are also strict ( too much ) when it comes to their rules , even qualified participants cant seem to participate on their campaign .
Due to the increase in the number of participants in your company, the number of payments decreases, thereby losing interest in participation of the majority of bounty hunters.
I think that limits are good for us, cause we can get more distribution not this low cost tokens in every bounty.
I think that limits are good for us, cause we can get more distribution not this low cost tokens in every bounty.
Bounty managers won't like to limit members in a campaign. I believe the more people get involve, the more news about the ICO spread. However bounty members will want it to be limited.
I think yes, otherwise the payments will be quite tiny, right rulle- first come-first serve!
Have you seen the table of bounty programs of the TokenSuite team? There are no restrictions and they are packed with a huge number of bots and scams, duplicating data with incorrect purse addresses. This command fills the table very well, but they need to limit the number of participants.
Yes, I hope that in the future they reconsider and have new rules to limits the number of participants. But I'm afraid that it's too hard for that thing happend because they need the a huge nuber of member for advertisement.
having a large number of participants is good because they are aiming for a posible wide exposure around the forum and there is no problem with that at all as long as they are not scamming their participants . they should also restrict their rules in order to avoid cheater and spammers to roam around the forum .
there is no need to limit the campaign participants because all of the users here do always want to be apart of the campaign but the problem is that there arent any new campaigns lately . some campaigns nowadays are also strict ( too much ) when it comes to their rules , even qualified participants cant seem to participate on their campaign .
I will say a very big yes because if there is a limit to numbers of participants in a campaign, there will be less crowd and there will be a reasonable amount of rewards to distribute to participant at the end of the campaign and it will also help to reduce the rate of having multiple account in a particular campaign.
Personally, I support the idea of having a particular limit of members in a campaign because this will help reduce the rate of having multiple accounts in a campaign and there will be enough allocations to distribute reasonable amount to participant at the end rather than having very large number of participant and the reward each get will not be reasonable.
definitely, Yes. then there will be a quality and payment more. I like managers who have restrictions, especially for the subscription. and some restrictions do not and if you look at their table, you will be horrified. there are too many bots and multiaccounts
Have you seen the table of bounty programs of the TokenSuite team? There are no restrictions and they are packed with a huge number of bots and scams, duplicating data with incorrect purse addresses. This command fills the table very well, but they need to limit the number of participants.
Yes, I hope that in the future they reconsider and have new rules to limits the number of participants. But I'm afraid that it's too hard for that thing happend because they need the a huge nuber of member for advertisement.
I am for limiting the number of participants. This gives us the opportunity to earn more. When we participate in a project with a large number of people, the earnings are small.
Who will deal with this restriction? Here the question is raised about making restrictions on this forum. I am absolutely against such restrictions on the part of the forum. This possibility is in the company ICO itself and if they deem it necessary, they apply this right to such a restriction. This is mainly done when the payment is made first not in shares, but directly in certain quantities of new tokens a week, or in bitcoin.
The goal of the ICO bounties is to get advertisement and marketing at various media in the internet at a low cost with a form of rewards(tokens) that are given to the bounty hunters for every successful campaign. If this is the case the more the participants with in the campaign just means that the ICO is getting a lot of attention and good publicity which will contribute to its success.the more people are involved, the more spam on the social networks and that is what they want, their ico will be for many people.
The purpose of bounty is to makerting and the more participants they promote success.But, as bounty hunter I think that limits are good for us, cause we can get more distribution not this low cost tokens in every bounty.
The purpose of bounty is to makerting and the more participants they promote success.But, as bounty hunter I think that limits are good for us, cause we can get more distribution not this low cost tokens in every bounty.
it seems that it already exists, signature campaign, in every bitcointalk profile you have if you want to be a participant of your signature campaign can only be a participant in one campaign only, will not be used for some campaign before the signature campaign that you follow is complete.
This is a nice a idea. The fewer the participants the higher the rewards you will get. But the thing is project team or bounty manager want to have plenty of parcipants due to that there are a lot of people would be able to get involve in promoting the project and which means it would attract more imvestors. I would something in mind. BM eould limit their participants to alteast 1k or leass then increase the volume of posts that the partcipant would deliver, like 20 post per day. In that way it investors would still catch the attention of the ICO, limited person with spam post, same thing with more particpants involve but lesser post.
Yes,I agree with the previous comment. Some companies register a lot of participants but a small number of participants receive steaks because of the complex requirements for the bounty program.
Dear all,
Sorry for any inconvenience for this topic,
I’ve ever joined some bounty campaigns and get some tokens. Bellow are my thinking:
There are some projects attract so much participants, although that means the project is very interesting but it has limited bonus. Result, bonus that each participant receivers from the campaign very small. A lot of participants in one campaign has made so many spams on social networking….
So a question here: Should we limit members in one campaign?
(maybe depend on the bonus value of that campaign)
What are your thinking?
Please share…
You are only seeing this from your perspective, it makes sense that you want to limit the number of participants since that means you will get bigger profits, but from the point of view of the developers they want as many participants as they can since they want as much publicity as they can get, after all there are many people that start strong and then get tired of doing bounties and quit, while others never do any work, so the number of people actually getting rewards is smaller than the number of people that were accepted in the bounty campaign. Sorry for any inconvenience for this topic,
I’ve ever joined some bounty campaigns and get some tokens. Bellow are my thinking:
There are some projects attract so much participants, although that means the project is very interesting but it has limited bonus. Result, bonus that each participant receivers from the campaign very small. A lot of participants in one campaign has made so many spams on social networking….
So a question here: Should we limit members in one campaign?
(maybe depend on the bonus value of that campaign)
What are your thinking?
Please share…
In my opinion, it is necessary to introduce a restriction on the quantity in general in all kinds of bounty campaigns.
of course, today because of the poor state of the market, there is a very low level of earnings in Bounty campaigns. Therefore, a large number of participants who pretend to a small pool of Bounty companies need to reduce. but apparently the Bounty manager has other views on this matter.
In my opinion, it is necessary to introduce a restriction on the quantity in general in all kinds of bounty campaigns.
Jump to: