Topic: The end of an era for me: Leaving Signature Campaign - page 2. (Read 1269 times)

There is no rules on minimum pay rates to avoid spam, in my opinion.
A campaign results in spam or not from their participants, it mainly depends on their management style and rule:

• Minimum characters of posts: Despite of the fact that post length is not the only factor to determine post quality, but it should be used as one of requirements to prevent spam.
• Time gaps between posts: Require time gaps between posts (such as 30 minutes) might prevent spam. By the way, I would like to emphasize that most of experienced managers don't have this rule or at least exactly minimum time gaps, but they have their own rights to judge which posts are burst-posting ones.
• Maximum of post cap per day to avoid both spam and burst-post
• Each companies have their own funds to run their campaigns, so they should have fair chances to run their ones here. As the core vision of theymos is maintaining a place for good newbies (as well as good start-ups, IMO).
• The management style of campaign managers will play important role to prevent spam. Managers will kick out spammers or reject to pay for spammers. So they will be kicked out or will do change their posting style (at least within period they join such strictly-managed ones)
• Campaigns need to be run in a long period to have effects in return for companies, so companies should expand their campaigns to as more weeks as possible with their funds for that purpose

Something like the above with 25 posts per week as the minimum to get paid. Paid weekly.

Better yet something like the above with 25 posts per month as the minimum posts to get paid.

Paid monthly.


I have not done a signature in so long I don’t even know what it pays.

Or simply, the campaign manager should come into an agreement to set a minimum payrate per rank then projects willing to pay participants above the minimum payrate are free to do so but no projects will pay below the minimum. This way project hoping to employ the best posters on the forum will be forced to increase their payrate to attract them. Some signature payrate are just so ridiculous they only attracts spamming.

For the payrate, I recommend minimum;
Member = 0.002BTC
Full member = 0.004BTC
Snr member = 0.006BTC
Hero member  = 0.008BTC
Legendary  = 0.01BTC

Same here as when I joined I mostly joined campaigns that had no minimum post requirement but lately all campaigns started changing rules. I started off making 5 posts when I was in signature campaigns and it was better to get paid for 5 posts and then I completely stopped in 2017-18 even though I used to post a lot in bounty campaigns as my country imposed a bank ban and then preferred private altcoin campaigns as I hadn't to make a single post but was just paid because of my rank per month. But when the altcoin market collapsed, am back to bitcoin-based campaigns but mostly they have a minimum requirement of 10-25 posts per week. I am mostly active in the cricket discussion group so always cross that limit but may rather not qualify later when I'll be less active after I relocate. Will join you then :=)

I think it's not accurate to compare the majority of f/w campaigns to ChipMixer since the pay rate difference is too high (I'd call it an outlier). The problem is like @eternalgloom said, the pay rate is too low for other campaigns. Furthermore, from what I see, service providers didn't differentiate post quality, and they only measure spam-able metric like traffic and perhaps conversion rate up to registration. Thus one hero signature from a quality member is equal to one hero signature from a shitposter (all links equal).

Trivia: even without minimum requirement, the average post for CM, for example, week 122, is 1632/56 = 29.14. It's already higher than the most campaigns that require 20-25 posts. However, the post count varied among members as some of them valued their time more than a mere 0.00075 BTC/post.

Hence, how to drive up pay rates? I only know to cut supply (less shitposters sigcamp participants) or increase demand (more casinos service providers).

@actmyname

Your logic seems sound at first glance and that's kinda how Chipmixer runs their campaign, except that they have a rather high max. posts per week.
If you look at all the other p/w campaigns out there, they pay way too little to be worth it for high-quality members.

I'd really like to see more signature campaigns abandon their current f/w model and switch over to p/w.
The problem with that though, is that it's probably a lot more labour intensive for the campaign managers.

I have no idea what the going rates are for campaign managers, but I reckon that expecting them to actually perform a more in-depth analysis on every post, would cause them to up their rates. If any campaign managers are reading this, I'd love to see your take on this...

On a side note: It is kinda ironic that a non-gambling campaign (Chipmixer) is currently offering the best paying signature campaign, by utilising the most lenient model with regards to post requirements. When I say lenient, I do not mean regarding post quality, but rather post frequency. You wouldn't think that a niche service like a coin mixer could "outbid" mainstream services like casinos, when it comes to signature campaigns.

Here is my thinking, and you can feel free to dig in as deep as you want to reject my logic.

If you are a strict campaign manager that seeks out only high-quality posts, but accepts a range of participants with varying post qualities, then the advertiser will benefit from the posts that are not eligible for payment.

For example: suppose we have a pay/post campaign in which there are 10 users with a cap of 25 posts/week. They post 200 posts in total over the span of the round. Of those 200, roughly 120 are eligible for payment.

What then happens is that you have higher quality posts than a fixed-rate campaign of 10 x 20 posts. Not only that, but you have the ability to reward the high-quality posters if the pay/post totals exceed that of the fixed rate.

The other part is that campaign participants are still rewarded for the 12 eligible posts they created rather than being subject to a loss of the week's funds just because they fell under the target. What you might have with fixed-rate campaigns is "post padding" in which they will forcibly post more than the amount to secure their payment, which is not the kind of behavior that induces (generally) good posts.

I see few drawbacks, except in the case where all the campaign participants that are accepted seldom post, to which the advertiser suffers if they want short-term gains. However, over the long-term, they will actually see more traffic with the same amount of funds. The best model for garnering long-term attention would be a medium-to-high reward pay/post campaign with a relatively low cap on the maximum rewarded posts for each round.

I can't say who's to blame because most (or all) signature campaigns have fixed post requirements, and I agree this is not the best model or maybe better to say most fair for users. If anyone is forced to post xx times per week to get pay, then there is no choice but to do it, even though it results in spam sometimes.

Is service providers ask managers to set up campaigns in that way, or managers suggest how the campaign will be done? I agree that most services want to run quick campaigns, and get as much exposure in as little time as possible, with of course a lower cost - which is not a good combination.

The fact is that there is a huge interest for any spot in ChipMixer signature campaign, but not only because of good pay rates, but also because participants are not limited by the minimum/fixed number of posts.

Those things come later when signature campaigns are your source of income.

When you have other means to make money, you can ignore the money point in sign. campaigns.

I think service providers push campaign managers to get the words out quickly to create hype. This effect cannot be achieved if posters don't do a minimum of x posts per week. So I cannot blame managers for this situation.

Speaking about the minimum weekly post, I think OP only need a little break, since he has been doing this sigcamp from 2014. @OP perhaps you should go on holiday in Bali, Indonesia, to charge your spiritual energy*

*intended advertisement

I don't know, there's nothing preventing me to join another signature campaign if I feel like it, the owner of my last campaign even mentioned to me that he'll let me join again if I ask him. Nothing lost there...

Now, I'd probably want to join Chipmixer actually, since their model looks really neat without those minimum post requirements, but there's close to 100 people gunning for that position once they accept new members.

Anyway, it's not something that's on my mind now, I'm just going to enjoy my time off for now and focus on doing some other stuff on the forum. I'm spending way more time on my Steem blog now, which I really enjoy doing.


Sorry in advance for quoting this entire reply, but you make some really good points.

Yeah that's the thing, I'm not a big fan of the current model of most campaigns. I've already mentioned it, but they should really look more at your existing posts and also give you the option to just post without minimum post requirements. I mean a member who has a couple of really popular, constantly relevant topics is worth a lot more than someone who just posts 25 times per week (or whatever the number is).

I've never understood the appeal of these various altcoin bounty campaigns, I've never even bothered with those. You constantly see posts in the Altcoin boards of how "bounty hunters are getting screwed". Honestly, I kinda laugh at those topics, because it's so easy to avoid getting screwed. Just don't participate... it's as easy as that.

And yeah, requirements to post in specific boards are also very annoying. Luckily I've never joined campaigns that had such requirements, that's something I just won't do.

About that signature you've created, it's a really neat placeholder until I find something different, you've done a really good job with that. Actually, I might just hire you to design a personal signature for me, possibly one for Steem, which I'd just use to promote it for free


Hehe, how long have you been without a signature? Or have you never even had one? I see you're always very active here, so that's a great example of how you can really thrive here without taking advantage of the so called "free money".

On an unrelated note, I might just start promoting my own publishing service here soon. I've been getting paid to write honest reviews on my Steemit blog for close to a year now, so I've built up a pretty decent portfolio with great reviews from customers. I'm a member of an "influencer agency", which gives me gigs from time to time, but I reckon I can just get customers myself through Bitcointalk.

It's always better to add some new business here on Bitcointalk, I think that keeps the in-forum economy going too. Now it's very much reliant on Signature Campaigns, but people tend to forget that there are other thriving businesses here.

If OP does not want to use a signature with simple texts, he can spend a few satoshis to get a professional signature. Here is a signature design service from Zwei, who managed one campaign that I joined months ago. His service costs only $15. I think it is not too much fee for rich guy, like OP. 
[15$]🌠 - 💎 Signature Design service - [updated].

What's a sig campaign?

I think there are far better things that you can do with your signature, other than promoting products that most people don;t understand and don't use. Your sig says something about your personality and your morality, but most siggers don't seem to care about this.

A unique topic on signatures I have read so far in the whole board from 1.5 year of stay. I have been constantly participating in signatures till last year, but recently even during the pump periods I don't find them really interesting as it was last year. Even if they pay me anywhere around $50-$100 I feel like I am being forced to post certain minimum amount of posts to fit the criteria. This was the sole reason, I have distanced myself from bitcoin campaigns till December 2018.

But after the insane line-up of scam coins in the market, I felt like I should never promote any altcoin through my signature. Majority of the altcoin campaigns have a 10 post limit which is really good for somewhat better poster like me. As I have said in many topics before, I don't post like others do (posting in a row, saying the same shit which is present already) and would most probably limit myself within 10 posts from the OP. I may have been more active than the active posters here who joined during my time, but the limit of posting I have set upon has prevented me from gaining any higher posts.

For instance majority of the quality posters who joined during end of 2017 or at the start of 2018 has posted more than 1000+ posts within a year, but I am still lagging at 700. I spend around 5+ hours here daily at varying time frames but would post a maximum of 1-3 posts. To the contrary I have been kicked from many campaigns for not maintaining the post count nor posting in the desired boards. If I were to be like as I was during Jan 2018, I would have spammed 25 one-liners for $1 per week. But the change this forum has brought in me, has made me get rid of money even how high they may be.

There had been many instances when I was at 23 posts with 3 posts in gambling at the last date of the payment week. So to receive the $50 payment the next day I should post 2 more in gambling to finish up the quota, but I didn't do that and informed the manager to kick me out of the campaign since I was not able to finish up the minimum criteria. If we are to post in this forum solely for receiving money, then we can not qualify ourselves as a respected poster even how good your posts are.

P.S :  That being said, thanks for using the signature which I designed. Think it like satoshi is paying you for promoting bitcoin.

Bounty managers will not simply calculate the posts of the week based on the last week post count since many campaigns won't count posts from certain boards and also old posts may get deleted which leads to decrease of the actual post count.

AFAIK,most managers count that week's posts manually.

The real reason why they have fixed requirement is due to the influence from the project they are working under.

It's easier to count posts when there is fixed requirement,  

BM just has to deduct current month's posts from previous month.

It's easier way, albeit with compromisation of quality (there are exceptions, of course).

OP, congratulations with your decision. I perfectly understand you. You just wanted some freedom. Campaigns which requires to make x posts to get paid, "force" users to post, even if they don't have what to say. And sometimes when we have bussy week it can be difficult to make enough posts to get paid. So, sometimes users have to write just for post count and it gives some pressure and can produce spam.
It would be nice if you will share your thoughts after some time without being in signature campaigns, how it changed your experience and posting habbits here.
There was some periods when I didn't had enough time for Bitcointalk and I was struggling to find good topics to reply something and I thought about leaving signature campaign. But it was temporary feelings. As said above, we have great opportunity to earn some money when we do what we like and it would be stupid to miss it.
@actmyname, you have valid points. But obviously advertisers want more visibility and this is why these requirements are needed - probably such campaign structure is the most effective.

Signature campaigns with fixed post requirements make no sense and are detrimental to the manager, to the participants, and to the service that is being advertised.

---

1) it produces spam.
2) in the case where the manager is strict in regards to post quality, the user's payment is at-risk even if they are a few quality posts below the requirement
3) the pay/post model can be adjusted in order to reward higher-quality posts and as such limit the number of accepted spam posts, reducing the overall cost of the campaign
4) a manager will have to read through at least X posts for each N people whereas a pay/post (with cap) is variable and will strike X*N good posts at most

That's actually a very good suggestion, I've changed my signature to the one you suggested in the meantime.


Yeah, the minimum post requirements are a bit strange for me as well.
I mean the thing that should matter most is the total number of posts and topics of a member IMO.

I have one topic that's doing quite well in the Google search results, I know because I get replies from completely new members who've only signed up to reply to that topic.
Stuff like that should be taken into account, because in the end it's all about making your signature visible to as many people as possible.

It would really be a welcome change if the majority of campaigns changed their model.

You have done the right thing!

I think at this point there's no doubt that the whole forum would have a more sincere positive vibe without the incentivized posting.

When people are forced to say something, there are great chances that is gonna be something stupid and without value.