Topic: Stake vs Fixed bounty allocation - page 10. (Read 7193 times)
Well, as the OP has already established, there are advantages and disadvantages to both mentioned concepts of reward "counting". I usually prefer the stake system as most of the time the fixed allocations per activity tends to be quite low, but of course there are shiny exceptions to that.
With stake allocation you can get more tokens based on the stake and how many participants join the bounty but that's that, the reason why I choose fixed allocation over stake is because right from the start you've know how much tokens you will get and the fact is merely looking or comparing bounties from one to another fixed bounty allocation performs better,they pays most times and no single participants is left out,what do you guys say about this?
I like the stakes , because I only like to participate in a signature campaign so the stake is the best choice in the fixed allocation, because the allocation always pays a small amount per week so I prefer stake. but if bounty allocation is small fixed token will be better than stake.
I'm ok with fixed if their token is already in the market, but prefer stakes based allocation if it is not, as a legendary member, choosing a stake based allocation is more advantageous and profitable, as long as the project is legit and they will not lock the token, it's not about the stakes anymore it's if the project has a good potential in the market that matters.
Its always like a box of chocolate, you'll never know what you get
Its from Forest Gump of course.You can chose STAKE but then you don't know how much tokens you get but then there is also FIXED where you know how much tokens you get already even before the the final spreadsheet is calculated. BUT its the price of every token that you have to look forward to and that's when it applies you never know what you get.
Bounty are not like before as they are now a cheat to hunters , they use the figure to deceive bounty hunters and use that crazy clause " we have right to change or disqualify any participants " to robbed many hunters , I dont have faith in both but I think the stake on what is sold is very useful than any percentage of allocation .
the problem is that if the rate is fixed then the payments are usually very small. That is why bounty hunters take risks and participate in projects where rules can be changed
Bounty are not like before as they are now a cheat to hunters , they use the figure to deceive bounty hunters and use that crazy clause " we have right to change or disqualify any participants " to robbed many hunters , I dont have faith in both but I think the stake on what is sold is very useful than any percentage of allocation .
the problem is that if the rate is fixed then the payments are usually very small. That is why bounty hunters take risks and participate in projects where rules can be changed With stake allocation you can get more tokens based on the stake and how many participants join the bounty but that's that, the reason why I choose fixed allocation over stake is because right from the start you've know how much tokens you will get and the fact is merely looking or comparing bounties from one to another fixed bounty allocation performs better,they pays most times and no single participants is left out,what do you guys say about this?
that always depends on several factors. with a high rank you are better off with variable stakes.
but that only up to a certain degree. but that has already been discussed here. you can be good or bad with both systems.
With stake allocation you can get more tokens based on the stake and how many participants join the bounty but that's that, the reason why I choose fixed allocation over stake is because right from the start you've know how much tokens you will get and the fact is merely looking or comparing bounties from one to another fixed bounty allocation performs better,they pays most times and no single participants is left out,what do you guys say about this?
fixed allocation in 99% of cases is completely stupid.
All of us know how token price changes especially after bounty is released.
They calculate fixed allocation as the token would hold the price as in ICO, this almost never happens, so you are left with pennies for your work.
Fixed is okay when bounty is paid in real crypto
like btc or eth.
If you have good skills with promoting cryptocurrency projects, making high-quality contents etc, the fixed bounty allocation is good. Because the team will be rewarded for your quality of work. The stakes based bounties depend on allocation and participants. Because we all know these days getting a large number of participants to bounties. Then we have to check out allocation and participants.
Bounty are not like before as they are now a cheat to hunters , they use the figure to deceive bounty hunters and use that crazy clause " we have right to change or disqualify any participants " to robbed many hunters , I dont have faith in both but I think the stake on what is sold is very useful than any percentage of allocation .
I prefer the allocation that is certain and does not change, and also the stake that must be adjusted according to rank or followers of social media accounts,
but, in many cases allocations are sometimes even cut because those who participate in the campaign are very few, this is very detrimental to me,
because it wasn't as expected, and the bounty finally arrived very little and far from the initial allocation even though it gained a lot of stake.
but, in many cases allocations are sometimes even cut because those who participate in the campaign are very few, this is very detrimental to me,
because it wasn't as expected, and the bounty finally arrived very little and far from the initial allocation even though it gained a lot of stake.
In bounty payments i think i prefer the fixed token allocation system to the stake based system. This is quite fair as it does not make higher rank members only get rewarded with huge amounts of the funds despite their little engagement or participation in the bounty campaign. I believe in the notion of work and pay, so the little everybody contributes should be worth decent and the stake system really violates that. Hence my interest in fixed allocation system of rewarding bounty participants.
Fixed bounty does give better indications of the quantity of tokens to expect at the end of the campaign unlike staked campaign. The downside is that they often offer smaller rewards and the token allocation are quickly exhausted.
Fixed bounty allocation will pay you with big catch with your hard work, also its depend with your rank, follower, friend or connection. But we can earn just a penni if so many participants
Fixed allocation, rarely we got big money from this, but we can predict how much we got, also we dont worry about so many participants
But for me, i choose stake bounty allocation
Fixed allocation, rarely we got big money from this, but we can predict how much we got, also we dont worry about so many participants
But for me, i choose stake bounty allocation
When in the bounty, the distribution of tokens takes place at the rates, it is better, because the fewer participants will be in the bounty, the more you will get in the end. But if everyone is given tokens at once, their size will not increase in proportion to the number of participants.
But if the participants are large, you will get a small reward distribution. Well, fix allocation and stakes have advantages and disadvantages. Stakes system may be more profitable if the participants are limited. 
I would prefer a static amount of tokens for campaigns like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn because usually there are a lot of hunters in such kind of bounties. Another picture with signature campaigns, usually there are less people who participates in it and stakes could be huge.
When in the bounty, the distribution of tokens takes place at the rates, it is better, because the fewer participants will be in the bounty, the more you will get in the end. But if everyone is given tokens at once, their size will not increase in proportion to the number of participants.
With stake allocation you can get more tokens based on the stake and how many participants join the bounty but that's that, the reason why I choose fixed allocation over stake is because right from the start you've know how much tokens you will get and the fact is merely looking or comparing bounties from one to another fixed bounty allocation performs better,they pays most times and no single participants is left out,what do you guys say about this?
It all depends on the specific campaign bounty, as well as on the number of participants and the number of tokens allocated for bounty hunters. Of course, a fixed fee is more reliable, but with a different payment method you can earn much more.
if the payment every week uses a token it must have a very long bounty duration because we can get a lot of tokens, if the duration of the bounty is brief and the participant joins a little then it will be very detrimental to the participant because a lot of the remaining tokens will be wasted if left out token?
I prefer calculation using stake because all tokens will be divided evenly depending on the rank of the account
It makes sense, but most bounties with fixed allocations have a limited number of participants, and it's usually always full even there is a waiting list. So that no reward is wasted. Just like the op, I also prefer bounty with fixed allocations because we already know for sure what range of prizes we get. On the other hand, the system stakes and fix allocation are equally profitable especially if you have a high rank. It's just that for the stakes system if the participants are not limited, the reward we get is only a little and unsatisfactory. I prefer calculation using stake because all tokens will be divided evenly depending on the rank of the account
Earlier, when there were more bounty projects, I participated in both, for me the project and its idea was more important than the award type.
Jump to: