Topic: Signature Campaigns: New Rule Suggestion (Read 690 times)

Just keep an eye on the services section there are campaigns that are allowing participants to post on local board. And while you are waiting there's nothing you can do but to improve yourself in English. An average level of grammar is enough just always be on topic and you'll be accepted soon.

---

I forgot that and yes it's another alternative for you, try to join those bounty campaigns most of them aren't restricting their participants to post in local so you'll be fine there.

You need to know that this forum have more members now then before. I'm checking service section every day, when new campaign appears after couple hours there are already 10 pages and 200 applications for free spot, and campaigns are looking for around 30-50 people.
There are many commentators and not so many managers, they are very busy and they can't follow everything that is happening in all campaigns. I agree that something has to be done about it, this forum can have better look. Things are changing in a good way, slowly but something is happening, and I think everything will be better in the future.

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.

This is already being implemented. It depends on the manager but i've seen campaigns that don't require you to wear a signature when applying. For example I've seen it done by m0gliE in his campaigns. Back when I was applying to yolo he was managing it and you were required to change the signature after being approved by the manager.
I agree that this is a very good rule to go by.

This point has two sides: commentators and managers. For us, commentators, it is going to be more useful to change a signature after it will be proved that we accepted in a new campaign. Oftenly it happens so that you changed the signature to enroll in a new campaign, but they didn't accept you and you stayed without an old campaign and new one. That happened to me several times.
But if to look on the point from the side of manager - they all don't like the forum would use as a source of money making and much more they don't like campaign jumpers. They are managers and they set their rules, which sometimes don't look for us too fair. Managers have much more power here on the forum and I am going to live by their rules.

Obviously that is cheating only bro. I don't think Lauda has been updated in services section signature campaign service thread. You have stick the same signature and can apply with the different campaign which states that saying will change the signature later.
If you looking into higher payment you will loose the days and posts you made here and you will loose your reputation also from the managers. Next time they will think before to take you in.

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.

Decoded doing that already I think. I have read the campaign thread he is managing. He just blocked the candidate who is jumping from one campaign from another frequently. Even atriz had speak about him. This is actually good to the spamming and another user can get the place to work in his place.

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.

Why would getting an answer back within 24h ever change anything for the better? Why did you waste your time mashing so many keys for such a useless suggestion?

This will not be implemented in any campaign. No one cares.

IMO, it's entirely up to the campaign manager to decide.

You as an applicant follow whatever the campaign manager has written in the terms and conditions and you agree to it. You don't have the responsibility to change the rules to suit people better. If campaign managers decide to follow your suggestion, then great, i'm all for it. Otherwise, it's really up to them.

I guess you meant scam accusation section not meta? considering you're going to complaint against a person/manager who doesn't pay you and clearly, signature campaigns doesn't directly concern the bitcoin forum.
What important is, participants must not spam that contradicts the forum rules.

As for the reasons on the OP, (1) wearing the signature/+avatar is just a prerequisite that you're qualified to be accepted and it's not granted as cheating (regardless of the time spent). (2) Like I said on the first, it's only a prerequisite , don't consider it as free and you're good to go. Learn to adjust on what was instructed and if you have a specific suggestion it's better to directly message it to the manager.

"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." Free advertisement for what? 48 hours? That's nothing. It simply just saves time for the campaign managers if the applicant already has the signature ready, compared to accepting a member then checking his profile every couple of hours or so just to confirm if he already has the signature on. That's so much unnecessary time wasted, considering most campaign managers manage multiple campaigns with more than a dozen members.

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.

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.

I fear, for some posters my thread was not clear enough.
My thread isn't targeted to all campaigns, only to those with the condition to apply by wearing signature, before participants are chosen.

Are you this worried to go a day without signature campaign?

You're looking at this from the wrong perspective. First, don't post crap. If you have decent posts, you can pick a campaign that will run long. I've been in my first signature campaign until the site closed, for about 18 months. Even though it didn't pay as good anymore at the end, I liked the site, which is worth a lot too.
When the site closed and the campaign ended, I took a few weeks to find a new campaign. No rush.

Let's put it this way: if you get rejected a lot, you shouldn't be in any signature campaign. Maybe that could be a new rule
I take pride of being in a campaign who's manager rejects shitposting. My former campaign even offered a reward if you'd report spam to him.

Agreed. My (our ) campaign manager easily takes 2 days to select 2 out of 20 applicants. This way he can cherry pick the best possible candidate.

If you are confident about your posting history, then I wouldn't be bothered to switch signature before applying to a new campaign. However, due to difference timezones you can't really expect managers you approved applicants right away. This is similar to applying for a job, they will screened you but you have to wait for several days before you know that you are accepted.

And as far as Nexchange, they have been tagged already, so the community lost trust in them. I didn't think they do intentionally, the only mistakes they have is hiring inexperienced manager to run their campaign. I'm sorry but I still don't get the free advertisement argument, its only about what, 1 to 2 days?

This rule can be useful for new managers, but there are hardly 5-6 managers who manage most of the campaigns and they accept or reject you in few hours after applying this rule would be nice though and some recent campaigns use campaign bots as well which shows if you're accepted instantly.

Indeed. I think the longest I've received feedback from my application(whether or not I got accepted or not) from past campaign managers was like 3-5 days maximum. 3-5 days is nothing; sometimes it can take you a whole month before you know if you got accepted or not when applying for a real job. I can't even imagine how hard it is for campaign managers that manage campaigns that accepts Jr member accounts. So much applications to filter through.

I get your concern here and it does have sense, but all rules for the upcoming and running campaigns, came from the one who or who will manage. And since they have their own personal life so it might caused to delay their works here like a couple of hours but if it takes a day or days then that is not good enough.

This suggestion is nonsense tbh.

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. Also, the reason why this forum is full of shitposts and spammers is because some campaign managers don't even take their time in reviewing their applicant's post history, which to me is contributing largely to the number of non-native English speakers' influx on this forum to go on and take a spot on a campaign.

Also, these services aren't even obliged to follow certain campaign rules made by users as long as they aren't breaking the forum's own rules. If you aren't accepted by a campaign, take it as a man and just move on. Nothing there to bitch about it.

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.

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)