Topic: ☛ Signature Bounty & Merit System - page 5. (Read 18801 times)
I think this is unrealistic, because now a lot of people participate in subscription companies and it’s not easy to check everybody thoroughly!
From my own view I think that isn't necessarily, as long as your post of no matter rank requires is being done, it is left for the manager to count and stakes you not going for how qualified or quality the post is base on merit before sharing stakes I think that won't be nice, and extra work for them as well.
I think its a lot of work to track the merit-status of the postings. Bounty hunters usually write hundrets of posts during an ICO, the manager would need an automatic system to analyze and count those posts. But its definitly a very good idea and worth a look at!
Merit data are public and I do not think that it's too hard to collect merit data. It could be realized by simple parsing of registered participant's profile or by using unofficial open API: https://github.com/mprep-btc/Unofficial-Bitcointalk-API/
Ya, there are definitly ways of tracking it, but the bounty manager has to do all the work to eg. write the code to retrieve the data and I think thats the cause why its not that common
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 2100
Marketing Campaign Manager |Telegram ID- @LT_Mouse
Not everyone but some do it. For example, yahoo offers a bonus of $25 each for 4 people who got the most merit. That's how it should be in every campaign. I will launch a bounty soon and I also have applied almost the same approach.
In the worst case scenario, the bounty manager will get overwhelmed with new load of work by implementing that calculation, since every member has different amount of merit in their account, that is perhaps what makes the bounty manager hesitate to implement it.
I don't think this kind of system really works. Because we all have different standards for quality. And I've seen some posts that are really helpful and does not get any merits. I also think that there are group of friends here in this forum that exchange each one of merits. They only make their post long enough to make it look like that it is really good but when you read it, it doesn't contain anything interesting.
I think it is quite difficult for managers, because actually the managers work with time. and most of the messengers don't just hold one bountyb project. besides that merit can't be shared that easily, there is a limit that someone can share their merit.
That would be a great idea and actually I see some campaigns managed by some bounty managers who require a number of merits to ensure the quality of each post but I also agree on the statement above that it may cause a lot of problem in buying/selling it. On the other hand, it is still a decision by managers and of course every project needs a lot of promoters.
that would probably promote the buying/selling, or easier, trading of merits I think.
but if it was going to be used, maybe it'd be better not to have it as a bonus, but the whole signature bounty like: make 5 posts that become merited.
although that's a bit outside the scope of a bounty manager maybe, plus very few would join those.
but if it was going to be used, maybe it'd be better not to have it as a bonus, but the whole signature bounty like: make 5 posts that become merited.
although that's a bit outside the scope of a bounty manager maybe, plus very few would join those.
the rules signature remains the same, bonuses will only be obtained from avatars and personal text. if you want to make more informative information, you can follow the article bounty, where you are required to make interesting information about the project, and you will certainly get a big bonus.
Because for members who are posting in altcoin boards chance to receive merit is very slim. If bounty managers would pick only members who are merited they would not have many participants. Less visibility for projects and that is not really what projects need. They need marketing.
That's what I like about you. We participate in a Signature Campaign not a quality problem or not. The most important thing that we discuss is according to the topic that exists and certainly must be useful. Projects really need marketing to succeed in selling their tokens. To be much interested by investors. I cannot imagine if the bounty manager must implement merit in every person who wants to participate in the signature. Because certainly certainly very few participated in the campaign.
Because for members who are posting in altcoin boards chance to receive merit is very slim. If bounty managers would pick only members who are merited they would not have many participants. Less visibility for projects and that is not really what projects need. They need marketing.
It is an interesting idea and some bounties are using already motivating merited posts with additional stake. It would increase post quality for sure. Would be nice if other bounties follow this attitude.
This could be discussed on META section I guess. But I really don't think your idea will be implemented because some of the messages from the signature campaign participants are spam
This issue has been discussed before on the forum.
And if I may correct you there are some signature campaign that gives reward to the amount of merit earned during the week
And if I may correct you there are some signature campaign that gives reward to the amount of merit earned during the week
More than a year ago Merit System was integrated to Bitcointalk forum to make forum messages more informative and quality (or should make it)
That is the question\idea: Why Bounty campaign starters/managers don't use that?
For example it would be an additional bonus for Signature Bounty participants if their message will be merited. It will confirm (in ideal) that the message will be detaily read and estimated and signature will be noticed for sure.
That is the question\idea: Why Bounty campaign starters/managers don't use that?
For example it would be an additional bonus for Signature Bounty participants if their message will be merited. It will confirm (in ideal) that the message will be detaily read and estimated and signature will be noticed for sure.
its a briliant , for basicaly
but , in this cases,
did the manager will want to do some extra jobs like that ?
checking each by each post ,
or u can say , the participant will tell manager about their post got merit
"hello manager , my post got a merit.did i will get extra payment ?"
then manager allocated some payment for people got merit,
then another people try to cheating merit system,then they got banned from a moderator
then they born again as a haters to this forum.
and my opinion, its will be useless in the end.
i just think , merit system created to reduce the birth rate of new member.
This solution makes sense but nobody will give tokens for a bounty post. It is extremely hard to earn merits, because more and more members are selling it against cryptos. It is too optimistic in my opinion.
Cooper membership or normal forum accounts are enough I believe
Nothing can be done to convince bounty managers, just make a very applauded posts and get your merits hopefully
Nothing can be done to convince bounty managers, just make a very applauded posts and get your merits hopefully
I think its a lot of work to track the merit-status of the postings. Bounty hunters usually write hundrets of posts during an ICO, the manager would need an automatic system to analyze and count those posts. But its definitly a very good idea and worth a look at!
Merit data are public and I do not think that it's too hard to collect merit data. It could be realized by simple parsing of registered participant's profile or by using unofficial open API: https://github.com/mprep-btc/Unofficial-Bitcointalk-API/
In view of that, I was surprised to see that some managers equate Copper Member account with the real Member account. That to me is not encouraging. Which then means that, if a want a reward beyond being a Jr. Member, I should go and by a Copper Membership.
Jump to: