Topic: Stake allocation - page 12. (Read 15706 times)
Well how can you say that those senior members would be the same performance as those lower ranks? Could you cite few quotes from those Jr. Members that brought great performance in posting? Those Jr. Members you're talking about would be in Senior Member in no time if they continue such great performance in posting. Earning merits in this exact board would be kinda rare but just don't expect merits to arrive anyway. It's like a luck in your mind that you think that you won't earn any but in fact you earned one.
I think the distribution of stakes is usually fair. in the bounty campaigns, most of the tokens of those participants are allocated - the posts of which are the most valuable on the forum. High members are always more influential
Yes it's true because higher rankings are considered more senior and more knowledgeable than Member ranks up, so this is also fair what you say.
I think the distribution of stakes is usually fair. in the bounty campaigns, most of the tokens of those participants are allocated - the posts of which are the most valuable on the forum. High members are always more influential
Do you think jr members are the same as the others who spent many years in this forum? Also, if you look well, you can see a lot of accounts increased from 0 to 100 and more.
The stakes depends on the signature space.
The space provided by senior member and hero members are more visible and bigger than the lower ranks.
When I was also new to the forum, I also noticed that but I don't know the history of it, probably that's it.
That caused by you need more effort to make or increase your rank from the newbie to the legendary. The history of stake created by the old system of BTT that gave you 14 weekly activity and you need a certain amount of your activity point to make you able to increase your rank. That's why there was a stake allocation based on level. The space provided by senior member and hero members are more visible and bigger than the lower ranks.
When I was also new to the forum, I also noticed that but I don't know the history of it, probably that's it.
I can't see the relation of it from why advertisers pays higher stake for higher ranks. And my explanation is likely to be the reason why they pay for good for higher ranks, due to the signature space and color, characters that it can provide.
More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.
So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.
So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.
I think the distribution where higher ranks get greater stakes is fair. This reflects the fact that a higher ranked account is generally considered more influential. Also as it has to have been built up by many posts over many years, it means the poster is an established and influential member of the forum - so they should get more stakes than say someone who has just joined. Higher stakes for higher ranks also goes some way towards addressing multi-accounting and spamming. This is similar to people with more social media followers getting higher stakes for Twitter/Facebook bounties.
The issue of whether merit is fair or not is a different question. It may be imperfect, but it is currently the best solution we have to solve the issue of people ranking up just by spamming meaningless posts. I myself have been partly lucky (because I got to Full Member before merit came in) and partly unlucky (because this means I'll never become Senior). I do feel for newcomers and those with really low ranks, but until someone comes up with something better, then the merit system is the best we have. It may have its flaws, but it is certainly a sensible and well-thought-out system.
What is the point for more allocation of stakes for senior members maybe to recognize their hard labours. Senior members hardly earn merits which is just a basis for their seniority. I think a new project has its own rules determining stakes for bounty hunters. So the stake allocation maybe a part of their rule. The only way to get more stakes is just labour to acquire merits by posting impressive and valuable posts. Only then your problem will get resolved.
It's due to they was intended to grow up their account so hardly so you will get more rewards as a legendary member, even if their quality post's very shit.
I think this is a fair system. If you are a useful member of the forum, then you deserve merits, and, accordingly, you deserve an increase in rank.
I do not know much about merit system. But I agree with you to some extent on this point. Stake allocations should be fair I think. But it is based on the terms and condition set by a project. I have also seen many projects allocating stakes not much far in volumes between all members. But one thing is true that at present, gaining merits are very much hard for newbies.
The stakes depends on the signature space.
The space provided by senior member and hero members are more visible and bigger than the lower ranks.
When I was also new to the forum, I also noticed that but I don't know the history of it, probably that's it.
That caused by you need more effort to make or increase your rank from the newbie to the legendary. The history of stake created by the old system of BTT that gave you 14 weekly activity and you need a certain amount of your activity point to make you able to increase your rank. That's why there was a stake allocation based on level. The space provided by senior member and hero members are more visible and bigger than the lower ranks.
When I was also new to the forum, I also noticed that but I don't know the history of it, probably that's it.
The stakes depends on the signature space.
The space provided by senior member and hero members are more visible and bigger than the lower ranks.
When I was also new to the forum, I also noticed that but I don't know the history of it, probably that's it.
The space provided by senior member and hero members are more visible and bigger than the lower ranks.
When I was also new to the forum, I also noticed that but I don't know the history of it, probably that's it.
More percent of stakes goes to senior members like Sr member, hero member or legendary under bounty campaigns. But except for few cases, their performances are similar to those by junior members like member, Jr member.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.
So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.
The percentage of stakes allocated is much far between senior members and junior members. Moreover, it is really hard to get merit nowadays unlike in the past when merits would be given based on the quantity of posts. Except for few cases, merits are awarded to only the nearer and dearer.
So what do you guys think about it? You are welcome to comment.
Jump to: