It is inevitable that there are so many bounty hunters, so we get a small prize, it is because of the many bounty scams, so that if there is a legitimate bounty, many will join, whereas bounties with fixed fees with limited participants can also only be in follow by members with high rank
A bounty campaign that keeps costs fixed and limits participants is a good thing and it is also carried out by the manager because it is forced and usually such campaigns are also due to small allocations, so restrictions are made for participants, because if that is not done the reward will be earned by each. Obviously there will be very few participants, so this is what we must understand because the conditions and situations are different. 
Topic: Solution to too many promoters - page 4. (Read 3286 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.
It is inevitable that there are so many bounty hunters, so we get a small prize, it is because of the many bounty scams, so that if there is a legitimate bounty, many will join, whereas bounties with fixed fees with limited participants can also only be in follow by members with high rank
It is hard to find solutions to lots of bounty participants, which is why i believe there is a single way, capped participants.
Each Bounty should cap each section ofbthe Bounty, then let it be first come, first served basis; then the bm is to evaluate each participation and ensure that spammers and defaulters are removed and replaced
Then the situation becomes win/win, project gets capable promoters, and low cap participants
Each Bounty should cap each section ofbthe Bounty, then let it be first come, first served basis; then the bm is to evaluate each participation and ensure that spammers and defaulters are removed and replaced
Then the situation becomes win/win, project gets capable promoters, and low cap participants
The solution to this issue is purely within the competence of the company's leaders. And frankly, they are least concerned about who gets how much as a reward. They are more concerned with the issue of target audience coverage. The bigger, the better. Not many will go for the imposition of restrictions, only the most interested in quality content.
Yes, there are not many campaigns that impose restrictions for bounty participants, because basically they (the team) want many people who like their project, but for bounty hunters this must be considered because they have to calculate the time they will spend on a project, if indeed the time they spend is in accordance with the reward he will get through the project, then it will not be a problem to follow, but if it is the opposite, then the hunter must reconsider this, because the small reward is not very suitable for time. valuable, except for those who do not value their own time.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.
The solution to this issue is purely within the competence of the company's leaders. And frankly, they are least concerned about who gets how much as a reward. They are more concerned with the issue of target audience coverage. The bigger, the better. Not many will go for the imposition of restrictions, only the most interested in quality content.
that's a good solution, but the problem is the project owner will never do this because the more bounty hunters join the campaign, the more effective the campaign will be. That's what they want, more bounty hunters, more people will know about the project.
many bounty hunters joined not yet able to prove the project is good or not Most of the bounty hunters joining the bounty only see the allocationIf the allocation is large they will join without checking how the quality of the project is that's what happened so far
it is not easy to prove that a project is good or not, as a hunter you can only take a leap of faith even if you have done all the necessary research and background check, it still depend on the project team to fulfill the promise of payment, once a project was able to pay all bounty reward as at when due then you can confidently say the project is good.
Limited participants is the best solution, we are in pandemic period now and many people have joined this forum meaning that we will have many bounty hunters joining Campaigns and rewards will be too low ,even now there is a trend of Defi and many people are taking part in it too.
Yes, there really is no other solution besides limiting participants in each campaign for now, because forum users have also started to increase a lot during the pandemic, so that it will reduce the rewards of campaign participants if there are no restrictions on participants. 
that's a good solution, but the problem is the project owner will never do this because the more bounty hunters join the campaign, the more effective the campaign will be. That's what they want, more bounty hunters, more people will know about the project.
many bounty hunters joined not yet able to prove the project is good or not Most of the bounty hunters joining the bounty only see the allocationIf the allocation is large they will join without checking how the quality of the project is that's what happened so far
Limited participants is the best solution, we are in pandemic period now and many people have joined this forum meaning that we will have many bounty hunters joining Campaigns and rewards will be too low ,even now there is a trend of Defi and many people are taking part in it too.
that's a good solution, but the problem is the project owner will never do this because the more bounty hunters join the campaign, the more effective the campaign will be. That's what they want, more bounty hunters, more people will know about the project.
if 3000 $ is divided by 500 participants then the result is 6 $ so actually it depends on the bounty hunter to respond if they think it's too little amount then they shouldn't have to join and choose another project.
can't make the project as an excuse the prize is too little because it's been told at the beginning.
can't make the project as an excuse the prize is too little because it's been told at the beginning.
I think there is no team who wants to limit their participants because that will give them less promoters.
They will save extra cost from doing that, because limiting participants means they need to add more cost to gain more promoters.
Running fixed reward based campaign is one of the right solution without limiting the participants.
They will save extra cost from doing that, because limiting participants means they need to add more cost to gain more promoters.
Running fixed reward based campaign is one of the right solution without limiting the participants.
I think,there are also some bounty managers who make regulations to limit bounty signature participants in a project because of the small allocation of funds for bounty hunters, if all prize managers limit participants from joining a project, participants who are late will be very disappointed if the project is very good.
By this time, there are a few, actually. Compared to how the bounty campaign works before, right now, bounty managers are starting to make it better. Instead of accepting every participant to promote the project, they started to have a limitation of how many participants are allowed to at least participate. And I think it is normal to be disappointed if you are not able to participate in a good project, but if you are late, that is not the reason to be disappointed. 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??
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??
The bounty project depends if the project actually earn a good amount of investors funds. Most of the time the number of participants doesn't matter at all since their are only a allocated funds that is going to go in the participants and it is going to be split depending in the stakes of the participants. Project could fail at some point when the bounty doesn't have enough investors so the devs probably wants to get a high number of promoter that they could get to encourage a lot of investors in the project. So it doesn't matter since it is a big help if their are so many promoters.
I think,there are also some bounty managers who make regulations to limit bounty signature participants in a project because of the small allocation of funds for bounty hunters, if all prize managers limit participants from joining a project, participants who are late will be very disappointed if the project is very good.
Did you realize that ICOs do not collect such money like in 2017? Did you realize that investors are less and less interested in low market cappitalization coins? That is the reason of our low rewards because there aren´t many investors that would buy our earned tokens. 
investor confidence in ICO is getting worse of course many investors run away if the project takes the form of an ICO but the era is already developingdefi is the choice of many investors because defi projects can generate profits in a short time
Did you realize that ICOs do not collect such money like in 2017? Did you realize that investors are less and less interested in low market cappitalization coins? That is the reason of our low rewards because there aren´t many investors that would buy our earned tokens.
investor confidence in ICO is getting worse of course many investors run away if the project takes the form of an ICO but the era is already developingdefi is the choice of many investors because defi projects can generate profits in a short time
Did you realize that ICOs do not collect such money like in 2017? Did you realize that investors are less and less interested in low market cappitalization coins? That is the reason of our low rewards because there aren´t many investors that would buy our earned tokens.
Jump to: