Topic: Solution to too many promoters - page 3. (Read 3286 times)
It's unfair that hundreds have joined to work at bounty, and its allocation tokens are low, I am with the idea of setting a suitable allocation with a limited number of participants so that bounty hunters who work for months get what they deserve from the tokens that give them a good return, and if the project team wants hundreds of hunters, they must increase the bounty allocation. There is no free promotion.
It depends on which side to look at.
If from the customer's side - you allocate a pool of rewards, in order to increase the information flow in social networks about your project. What difference does it make to you how much each bounty hunter gets? You need the highest coverage per 1 unit of the reward pool.
On the bounty hunter's side, of course, it is better for him to participate where there is a limited number of participants. But even if you take a subscription company, and if it has for example 10 participants, including 4 members, 5 Full and one Legendary, in the end, the Legendary will take everything.
If from the customer's side - you allocate a pool of rewards, in order to increase the information flow in social networks about your project. What difference does it make to you how much each bounty hunter gets? You need the highest coverage per 1 unit of the reward pool.
On the bounty hunter's side, of course, it is better for him to participate where there is a limited number of participants. But even if you take a subscription company, and if it has for example 10 participants, including 4 members, 5 Full and one Legendary, in the end, the Legendary will take everything.
You are very right, the only solution to bounty hunters getting low rewards is what you've stated in your post, there should be limit to numbers of participants needed for specific bounty campaign, so that rewards will be fair for few hunters that manage to get in.
Bounty campaigns do not care how much each participant will earn. They allocate a pool for a bounty campaign and it makes no difference to them by how many participants divide it by 10 or by 100. On the contrary, the more participants there are, the more noticeable the advertising on the forum will be. You yourself can see how many people are already participating in the campaign and decide whether it makes sense to participate because the reward will turn out to be small.
The only way to get rid of them is to go into them and consider the best factors to decide on a bounty program. Find the best project and use up your skills to bring out the most rewards. If you are a good writer, do it well and develop your video editing skills. I think self-skill development has a big advantage in bonus programs.
You are very right, the only solution to bounty hunters getting low rewards is what you've stated in your post, there should be limit to numbers of participants needed for specific bounty campaign, so that rewards will be fair for few hunters that manage to get in.
This is an exceptionally pleasant recommendation and just hardly any bounty chiefs are doing it while others are not, the explanation is up to them. Be that as it may, notwithstanding, if the assignment is good enough perhaps the bounty director may eliminate limits which obviously will at present pull in more members while the good thing is, they will wind up with a substantial prize. Then again, bounty supervisors that doesn't put restricts just winds up making members works less fulfilling and it doesn't bode well.
There are enough bounty hunters on this forum. I even think that the forum is popular primarily because you can earn money here. When someone starts to arrange something, it always turns out with excesses. If you see that someone is doing their job badly or violates the rules of the forum, you can always complain to his bounty manager. If he does not take any response measures, then the moderators on the forum will always be ready to listen to you, they are responsive and work hard.
This is the difference between good bounty managers and ordinary ones. A good one will hire a person, for a small fee, who will check all social network participants for the quality of the content and the quality of the services provided.
A good project does not need useless marketing; it needs a precise and high-quality presentation of itself through bounty hunters.
Is there really a way to check the quality of the work of the bounty hunter if their only task is to like or share in social media? I don't think that there is a need for that quality check. What they need is to limit their bounty participants to at least give them enough opportunity to receive more rewards. A good project does not need useless marketing; it needs a precise and high-quality presentation of itself through bounty hunters.
This is the difference between good bounty managers and ordinary ones. A good one will hire a person, for a small fee, who will check all social network participants for the quality of the content and the quality of the services provided.
A good project does not need useless marketing; it needs a precise and high-quality presentation of itself through bounty hunters.
Is there really a way to check the quality of the work of the bounty hunter if their only task is to like or share in social media? I don't think that there is a need for that quality check. What they need is to limit their bounty participants to at least give them enough opportunity to receive more rewards. A good project does not need useless marketing; it needs a precise and high-quality presentation of itself through bounty hunters.
The conditions in the crypto market for new projects have changed a lot over the past 3 years.
If earlier a project, even with a weak marketing company, could easily carry out a successful fundraising, today it is necessary to make truly titanic efforts so that investors look at your project and decide on an investment.
I think this is for the best, because now it’s extremely difficult for any garbage to get to the top, but for good projects the conditions have become more complicated.
Therefore, the more hunters participating in the project, the higher the chances that he will succeed.
An alternative would be bounty companies that accept only really effective hunters, this would create a natural precedent for improving the overall quality of work among bounty hunters due to the increasing complexity of the conditions.
If earlier a project, even with a weak marketing company, could easily carry out a successful fundraising, today it is necessary to make truly titanic efforts so that investors look at your project and decide on an investment.
I think this is for the best, because now it’s extremely difficult for any garbage to get to the top, but for good projects the conditions have become more complicated.
Therefore, the more hunters participating in the project, the higher the chances that he will succeed.
An alternative would be bounty companies that accept only really effective hunters, this would create a natural precedent for improving the overall quality of work among bounty hunters due to the increasing complexity of the conditions.
How do you think a bounty manager can define an effective hunter? For example, in a signature campaign there are usually few participants and, in principle, they can be examined. But if it's a social media campaign? There can be 200 or 500 participants. Even with a limited number. It's very difficult and time consuming. I don’t think that someone will do this, because projects need advertising and as extensive as possible.
This is the difference between good bounty managers and ordinary ones. A good one will hire a person, for a small fee, who will check all social network participants for the quality of the content and the quality of the services provided.
A good project does not need useless marketing; it needs a precise and high-quality presentation of itself through bounty hunters.
Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?
Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants
What do you think??
I also think they should limit the participants and we have seen this already implemented by some popular bounty manager like bubblex and ulum. Their campaign was successful. Actually, bounty hunters are decreasing because of low reward allocation. What we are seeing in the spreadsheet is multi id users mostly especially on a social media campaign.
I would think that the majority would prefer this system of limited bounty spots, but this would mean that the whole thing would be based on the FCFS (first come first serve) basis, so you would have to constantly look for newly created bounties if you would not want to miss your spot, which could be a major pain in the ass. There is no perfect system for this, but this could definitely be a step in the right direction.
and also you have to calculate whether it is worth doing for you.
for example as you mentioned earlier, if 3000 $ is divided by 500 participants then the result is 6 $ for each participant until the campaign ends.
this is just an addition so that each participant always counts in advance when they want to join, and will not blame the bm or the project for getting a small fee.
for example as you mentioned earlier, if 3000 $ is divided by 500 participants then the result is 6 $ for each participant until the campaign ends.
this is just an addition so that each participant always counts in advance when they want to join, and will not blame the bm or the project for getting a small fee.
Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?
Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants
What do you think??
So many bounty hunters do not care about bounty hunters, have you read about IQ.Cash bounty so many bounty hunters have received from $2 to $10 only after months of promoting their project and they are now holding another campaign, it makes bounty hunters beggars, bounty hunters should not join,. IQ.Cash they treat them as slaves and not independent partners.
This is the problem with herd mentality in selecting the bounty projects to promote. While it is necessary to select a genuine project to promote it is also a must that we select a project which will reward us for the time we spend in promoting the project.
Getting 10 $ worth after a month work is really really bad.
It would be best if the bounty managers limit participation of hunters on the basis of first come, first served. One of the reasons for low reward is because when a project looks promising, several hunters will desire to participate in the bounty program and thus reduce the reward.
a good solution might be with limited participants as well as a fixed bounty allocation. and this is certainly good, so it's worth our efforts in promoting the bounty project. but the problem is that good projects are always the target of bounty hunters.
it's only fair to the project itself and unfair to bounty hunters. I mean like this if a project picks up thousands of bounty hunters and this is the profit point for the project. the more participants the more the ad. whereas for bounty hunters the more participants the less the reward. isn't it begiutu?
I know that scam bounty projects still shows up on this forum from time to time but after managing to promote the bounty that's not a scam you end up with very low bounty reward, why ? I think the problem about bounties is we have too few bounty campaigns and too many bounty hunters
JUST IF
Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?
Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants
What do you think??
I totally agree to this sentiments knowing that there are several bounty participants who join a particular campaign with a lesser bounty allocation which they work for so long it is really inhumane. I second the motion with regards to limiting the bounty hunter to a specific campaign so it can ensure that there will still be a good number of rewards for each bounty participants or just a suggestion that instead of rewarding them with the token of the project why not paying them in terms of stable coins or well-known cryptos, it can lessen the dumping of the token/coin of the project as well. JUST IF
Just if bounty managers and project teams can start limiting bounty hunters the reward will still be fair enough, how can 500 participants share 3000$ bounty allocation?
Where are the bounties with fixed bounty allocations? After doing some digging on past bounty campaigns I noticed many of them have fixed rewards, this is good or limited participants
What do you think??
I can't support OP though, but the limited bounty allocation is very low. Although bounty hunters aren't much more than before. Bounty allocation is decreasing day by day, I found some bounty allocation is 0.005 percent. Bounty managers should increase the allocation as before 1-5 percent, but distribution will happen at different times.
This is what makes a project insanely rewarding for bounty hunters
1. High demand for the projects coin or token
2. Limited participants for bounty campaigns
3. Low bounty allocation ( of course this won't matter since the coin has good value )
Spend your time and energy with projects that are very transparency in all ways.
1. High demand for the projects coin or token
2. Limited participants for bounty campaigns
3. Low bounty allocation ( of course this won't matter since the coin has good value )
Spend your time and energy with projects that are very transparency in all ways.
We seldom see this campaign anymore and just so lucky that I am on one of those campaigns the campaign I'm in has closed registration because they want to protect the stakes of their early promoters, this is a good move and we can see that the bounty manager and the team cared for their participants.
Jump to: