Should we limit members in one campaign? - page 5.

tolgahanuzun

member

Activity: 308

Merit: 10

Quote from: A.SanchezNo7 on April 07, 2018, 05:04:14 AM

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…

I think limiting participants in bounty companies is the right decision. From this win both bounty participants and its organizers.

shinas

member

Activity: 336

Merit: 10

Undoubtedly, limiting the number of participants would have a positive effect on the promotion of the project and on the reward of each participant. You could even limit by rank, as do some bounty managers.

Jamboo30

member

Activity: 378

Merit: 10

I think limit the participants is one of the important way to improve the efficiency when marketing the ICO project. Many scammers join with multiaccout and they dont have the responsibility to help this project. In my opinione, vote for limitation.

muzkle

full member

Activity: 266

Merit: 100

The Premier Digital Asset Management Ecosystem

I think not. Because bonus managers and ICO want as many participants as possible. And they will attract as many ICO participants as possible. Nobody wants to limit the number of people who know about the ICO. Except for bounty participants

CoinEraser

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1768

Quote from: jurgen444 on July 08, 2018, 09:33:50 AM

in my opinion better in each campaign limited number of participants, I have been following the campaign for 3 months and only get $3 rewards and it is very sad .. for now, I prefer a campaign that limits the number of participants, hopefully later many bounty manager do it.

I have the same opinion. There should be a limit for participants in a campaign. It would only be fair for the participants. This could also prevent a campaign from being overrun by alt accounts. Although I can understand that a project like to have many people in the campaign, so they can do more advertising, but still they should be fair to the participants. Therefore, I try not to participate in campaigns that are already totally overcrowded anyway. It's usually not worth it. Wink

jurgen444

jr. member

Activity: 134

Merit: 5

in my opinion better in each campaign limited number of participants, I have been following the campaign for 3 months and only get $3 rewards and it is very sad .. for now, I prefer a campaign that limits the number of participants, hopefully later many bounty manager do it.

Rustamm

member

Activity: 532

Merit: 18

Bitcoin lover!

I am categorically against limiting the number of participants in the ICO generosity campaign from this forum. This restriction can and does sometimes make the ICO team and the manager of the generosity campaign. Other persons should not interfere with this process. Everyone has the right to choose independently to join him to a specific ICO project, or not. This case is voluntary and it must be accepted and taking into account the number of joined participants.

zhukovt34

full member

Activity: 225

Merit: 100

Augmented Reality World Discovered

The members number in bounty campaign should be limited in order that every participant participate in a professional manner, do his homework and get bounty it deserve!

so_stupid

full member

Activity: 448

Merit: 103

Bitgesell (BGL) Decentralized Cryptocurrency!

I consider it necessary to make a limit in bounty companies! The choice of the subscription company should be more responsible for the bounty hunter.

ridhobagus2308

full member

Activity: 358

Merit: 100

i think yes , right now bounty have to much people and they even joined with multiple account, its good to us if bounty campaign limited their participant.

hardtargetbtc002018

newbie

Activity: 173

Merit: 0

Quote from: A.SanchezNo7 on April 07, 2018, 05:04:14 AM

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…

Yes, limiting participants in a bounty campaign can really help bounty hunters to earn more profit especially those with low ranks because the most affected during rewards distribution is the partcipants with low ranks even participated in too many weeks.

crzy

full member

Activity: 2128

Merit: 180

Quote from: Sermihal on July 08, 2018, 01:25:59 AM

I think it would be better to limit the number of people. If you participate in a bounty and a lot of people reward for your work will be very small. It is better not to participate at all than to get very little.

There must be limitations with regards to the participants but of course the more volume of bounty hunters it will be in favor for that specific project so technically some ICO don’t limit the participants. Well, btc signature campaign is the best when it comes to implementing rules about that campaign.

tntdl

newbie

Activity: 86

Merit: 0

I think we should limit the participants to the bonus campaign. Because I know many people in my country they spam to participate in the bonus campaign

mriansa

full member

Activity: 560

Merit: 105

it seems to limit everyone to follow the bounty campaign is not necessarily in need but it really should be 1 person 1 bounty, if you want to follow bounty again yes become a participant from other bounty. maybe it is not spam but the marketing strategy of ico is there.

A.SanchezNo7

newbie

Activity: 252

Merit: 0

Quote from: jamesbond007pro on July 08, 2018, 03:35:31 AM

Dear friend. That's good idea. If one campaign limit members to join we will get more money. I think one campaign such as Facebook, Twitter should limit 1000 members, that's good for bounty members and bounty managers. Do you agree with me? Thank you very much

Thank you for your sharing.
I agree with you. 1000 is the number make the project manager and bounty hunter both feel satisfied. too little or too much are both not good. The 1000 should be the reference number of participants for twitter and facebook campaign.
However, depend on the bonus pool, the project manager can consider another suitable number.

ximenzi

newbie

Activity: 103

Merit: 0

Quote from: A.SanchezNo7 on April 07, 2018, 05:04:14 AM

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…

If you look at this issue from the perspective of a bounty hunter, then your idea is very correct. But if I am a publisher, the purpose of my bounty activities is to promote and promote, then I naturally hope that there will be more people to help me with the promotion. so.....

jamesbond007pro

newbie

Activity: 238

Merit: 0

Dear friend. That's good idea. If one campaign limit members to join we will get more money. I think one campaign such as Facebook, Twitter should limit 1000 members, that's good for bounty members and bounty managers. Do you agree with me? Thank you very much

anwar98

member

Activity: 336

Merit: 10

Quote from: hoangvuthach on April 07, 2018, 05:24:15 AM

Unlikely, 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

More and more participants and just make spam what's the point?
Better to be limited but choose a member who has higher rank and have good experience in promotion. Better fewer participants have good experience in promotion and have higher previews than many participants but only make spam and only focus on rewards regardless of the quality of their promotions.

ashaksagnis

full member

Activity: 630

Merit: 104

It would be much better if the campaigns had a limited number of members. The largest number of members is always in social media campaigns. Of course everything depends on the bounty budget. I think that the best is the signature campaign and should definitely introduce limits.

Sermihal

newbie

Activity: 154

Merit: 0

I think it would be better to limit the number of people. If you participate in a bounty and a lot of people reward for your work will be very small. It is better not to participate at all than to get very little.

Topic: Should we limit members in one campaign? - page 5. (Read 1560 times)