Topic: Signature Campaigns: New Rule Suggestion (Read 641 times)

How i wish that all of signature campaigns considered the local board posting. Because not everyone who joined a signature campaigns are all fluent in English. If we allow to local board posting then i must be thankful.

You can try bounty campaign

You can try bounty campaign https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=238.0 most of them allow you to post on local

Why signature campaign is too restrict ?
As we know, bitcoin value getting increase and there will be more people interest on signature campaign so for who can't follow the rule, they can't join the campaign because this forum mostly require quality rather than quantity

How i wish that all of signature campaigns considered the local board posting. Because not everyone who joined a signature campaigns are all fluent in English. If we allow to local board posting then i must be thankful.

Completely agree on this one since some managers would really set out some rules if they would choose up participants that wore their signature compared to those who applied without wearing the code and the time of acceptance would vary on them and this is somehow the risk when you remove your current signature because you do apply on other sig with higher payment rates but unluckily you havent accepted then some people would really cheat the system and would tend to wore up again the previous signature which they do play safe but can be consider cheating.

The rule of wearing the signature at the time of applying is not actually implemented on every campaign, but there are just a few of them which are doing this thing, and i don't think someone can ask anyone to change their rules or add new rules. It is totally up to the manager or the owners of the project to implement any rule to the campaign. As long as the rules aren't against the forum rules, they cannot be questioned, but it is up to the person if he can take the rules or not. If a user do not like the rules, he simply should move to another campaign.

P.S. And there was one participant who have been caught jumping from one campaign to another and then went back when we was rejected. Unfortunately, he was caught and subsequently get the red tag. And I totally agree with you all, this rule show not be implemented. Its still up to the campaign manager. And we can't really force they to apply it to their campaign. If you are rejected then something must be wrong with your posting or posting history.

I agree with user dothebeats minds above. There is no reason to rush signature campaign managers just to prevent free advertising of company. Anyway, mostly campaign managers accept or deny users quite fast. You should understand that posting with having paid signature is not a job, so, you will not loose anything if you won't get paid for some posts.
P.S. It's a bit fun to see users who always jumping through campaigns when they notice higher paying campaign started. They leaving current their campaign in middle of round and if they not accepted to higher paying campaign, they back to their current campaign again. I think that users have to show a little loaylty to company that they are advertising and not behave like a bitches.

There are some campaigns like that. They are requiring to wear the signature and avatar before apllying and takes a day before they post the accepted members. This is a free advertisement to them. But that's a sign also that you are willing to comply and you trust the manager. So im fine with that. If the manager doesn't pay you. Then you are free to make a complain at the meta section or even give a negative feedback. Not all managers are like that. When applying on a campaign. Make sure that the manager is a well experienced manager. I don't trust newbies to handle a campaign. Anyway, they are the managers. They are the one who sets the rules, not us.

There are some campaigns like that. They are requiring to wear the signature and avatar before apllying and takes a day before they post the accepted members. This is a free advertisement to them. But that's a sign also that you are willing to comply and you trust the manager. So im fine with that. If the manager doesn't pay you. Then you are free to make a complain at the meta section or even give a negative feedback. Not all managers are like that. When applying on a campaign. Make sure that the manager is a well experienced manager. I don't trust newbies to handle a campaign. Anyway, they are the managers. They are the one who sets the rules, not us.

~ then campaign managers should aporove or denie within a day or call a date ~

Applicants on a signature campaign (which shouldn't be around in the first place) shouldn't rush the managers in any way since they're the ones who need something from the campaign.

Some Signature Campaigns have the rule to wear signature, when participants want to apply, before they know, wether they will be in or not.
My suggestion is to have a new rule for all those signature campaigns:
When participants are demanded to wear signature already before they get approaved, then campaign managers should aporove or denie within a day or call a date, when participants are prooved.
Reasons:
1. This rule should prevent against cheating the participants and other campaigns, which are not able to pay such high pay rates.
2. Participants know, when they get approaved and are not blocked to apply for other campaigns instead of waiting several days and posting for free for this campaign.

Most campaigns are led by honorable campaign managers, who clear out, when participants should apply and when they get approaved or the approval happens even within hours or one day. That is ok.
But some managers or devs don't. The rule would be for them. We had a good example, how the system was cheated (nexchange opened three campaigns and one of them only collected participants, who posted several days for nothing with their signature. They had highest payment promises Then nexchange closed this campaign without choosing any participants and just opened a new campaign with low pay rates. So they had free advertisment from many members in this forum)