Pages:
Author

Topic: The signature campaign “syndrome” - page 3. (Read 1204 times)

hero member
Activity: 2128
Merit: 532
FREE passive income eBook @ tinyurl.com/PIA10
My campaign requires 20 posts a week and I think that 20-25 is optimal number. Bigger requirements would significantly reduce quality of posts I think.
But still, when I have bussy week or I don't find interesting topics to post, sometimes reaching even 20 posts isn't that easy.

True that. Ngl if the topics were to cover beyond just Bitcoin and Meta, things would be more interesting. Sadly Off-topic is not counted since that place is spammed to hell.

Serious Discussions and Ivory Tower are meanwhile, another level on their own.

That's true some how from business perspective but from user perspective it depends yes 3.5 posts/day does not seem a lot but problem appears when you skip a day or two? Now pressure is on the user to complete 10+ posts in day or you gonna loose the whole week.

It happened before (myself included), but I'll usually even out over the week. Not too long ago, I saw Hhampuz addressing the issue of members just barely reaching the minimum quota.

In the end, it's the attitude. If one has an extremely busy schedule at work, it's highly advised to not join unless he or she has very good time management because it's quite easy to overlook/ take things for granted.
hero member
Activity: 2520
Merit: 952
In my experience, I find posts of people who are 'trying' to rank up more spammy than the ones who are participating already.

Most BMs prefer quality posting, so people who participate usually try to make better posts.

Also, I'm impressed with poll, despite most of the bitcointalk detesting signature campaigns they don't disable them.
copper member
Activity: 1526
Merit: 2890
Can't blame the advertisers for setting such criteria. Having paying the participants on a weekly basis, surely they'd want to make the best of their budget. That's how business works.

I find that 25 a week is a sweet spot. Divided by 7 days, that averages to 3.5 a day. Not too demanding if you ask me.

If everyone simply posts like a few times per week, it's unfair for other participants due to the lack of rotation.

That's true some how from business perspective but from user perspective it depends yes 3.5 posts/day does not seem a lot but problem appears when you skip a day or two? Now pressure is on the user to complete 10+ posts in day or you gonna loose the whole week.

Yes many users can keep up with this pace without compromising the quality. But I'm looking at it from my own perspective, I know If I join any such campaign and I skip a day which gonna happen then I won't be able to complete the task with some "shitposts"... or posts just for the sake of completing my post count.


If you search a little bit more, you'll find them.
I never knew about those well to be honest I never searched for it, I automatically assumed that no such thing exist but yes now I agree they do exist but once in a blue moon Smiley


That's exactly how the ChipMixer campaign has been set up. There is no weekly minimum to get paid. You can make 1 post that qualifies for payment, and you will be paid for it. In fact, if you take a look at the spreadsheet for CM, you will notice plenty of users who haven't been active several weeks in a row, but they still remain participants in the campaign. Others post just a few posts per week and ask the manager to hold their payments until they gather something significant to withdraw to their wallets.
Thank you for highlighting, yes i knew ChipMixer is one of the very few and highly credible signature campaigns and i did not notice that they have relaxed rules on number of posts which indeed is a good sign and without any pressure on the participants. Thank you for sharing
legendary
Activity: 2240
Merit: 3150
₿uy / $ell ..oeleo ;(
Just for the record, I have both sigs and avatars off.
I know most of the nicknames of the old and the valuable members and it's easier for me that way. Avatars could be confusing sometimes.I was replaying toa post while looking only at the avatar and it turned out that I replay to a another person, because I didn't look at the nickname.

Reading the posts in most of the threads you can easily see who are posting only to fulfill the signature campaign requirements.
hero member
Activity: 2366
Merit: 793
Bitcoin = Financial freedom
I find that 25 a week is a sweet spot. Divided by 7 days, that averages to 3.5 a day. Not too demanding if you ask me.
My campaign requires 20 posts a week and I think that 20-25 is optimal number. Bigger requirements would significantly reduce quality of posts I think.
But still, when I have bussy week or I don't find interesting topics to post, sometimes reaching even 20 posts isn't that easy.

Some forum members still make 100 posts which are on topic and do some contribution to the forum even when their campaign needs 25 posts or less than that so it depends upon the user and how much time they got to spend with the crypto related activities.

25 posts per week is average number for most of the campaigns for very long time, but the pay rate of the campaign actually give an assumption about the quality of posts they are making? Nope for me!
legendary
Activity: 2814
Merit: 2472
https://JetCash.com
, I'll ignore most of the users that participate on a low-paying signature campaign,

I have absolutely no idea which sig campaigns are low paying. I ignore all sigs that appear to be a part of a campaign, as I don't believe that the members use the products, and have no idea of their quality or benefits.
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 1375
Slava Ukraini!
I have a bit similar syndrome. I tend to pay less attention to posts made by users who participate in non-Bitcoin paying campaigns. Especially if it's made by users who isn't familiar for me. Maybe now it's not that big problem, but few years ago when bounties where bigger thing, reading posts by bounty participants was big waste of time.
And I don't hide signatures and avatars. I wear paid signature myself, so I would be hypocrite if I would do this.
I find that 25 a week is a sweet spot. Divided by 7 days, that averages to 3.5 a day. Not too demanding if you ask me.
My campaign requires 20 posts a week and I think that 20-25 is optimal number. Bigger requirements would significantly reduce quality of posts I think.
But still, when I have bussy week or I don't find interesting topics to post, sometimes reaching even 20 posts isn't that easy.
hero member
Activity: 2128
Merit: 532
FREE passive income eBook @ tinyurl.com/PIA10

That's exactly how the ChipMixer campaign has been set up. There is no weekly minimum to get paid. You can make 1 post that qualifies for payment, and you will be paid for it. In fact, if you take a look at the spreadsheet for CM, you will notice plenty of users who haven't been active several weeks in a row, but they still remain participants in the campaign. Others post just a few posts per week and ask the manager to hold their payments until they gather something significant to withdraw to their wallets.

That's one rare case. Doesn't that just leave the campaign with lots of "dead" members should they decide to become inactive? If I'm a marketer, I would definitely not want to operate on such model because my brand isn't being advertised frequently. Don't mind the rates, but there are times when you'd prefer to spread the message as broad as possible.

In the end, it's up to the owner's discretion.
legendary
Activity: 2436
Merit: 1189
Need Campaign Manager?PM on telegram @sujonali1819
I am in this forum since starting of 2017. Never I ignored the signature or avatars. And to be honest I enjoy to see them. (Don't know how many people will agree to me. But I really enjoy it)

To my personal view signature campaign keep the forum active, But it also true that signature campaigns help to increase the spamming here. And this could be prevent atleast a little if the campaign manager make the rules that there is no minimum payment for week. So that people don't feel pressure and make spam.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
I don't put signatures on ignore because I find it to be deceptive to participate in a signature campaign, and at the same time have those signatures on ignore. I don't mind seeing them. I don't have prejudices against participants, based on the signature campaigns they take part in. The campaigns are limited and sometimes you are just late or a decision has to be made between two equally good posters. What I don't like is looking at ads of scams and questionable exchanges like Yobit or HitBTC.

I haven’t found any campaign which have a soft corner on this and gives a choice to the user if he want to post 1, 10 or 50 posts in a week. But not forcing on certain number of “must have” posts.
That's exactly how the ChipMixer campaign has been set up. There is no weekly minimum to get paid. You can make 1 post that qualifies for payment, and you will be paid for it. In fact, if you take a look at the spreadsheet for CM, you will notice plenty of users who haven't been active several weeks in a row, but they still remain participants in the campaign. Others post just a few posts per week and ask the manager to hold their payments until they gather something significant to withdraw to their wallets.
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
Even if signature campaign was a thing 7 years ago, it wasn't the same as it is today. It's much more intense in the last 3 years, it's been seen as a real business. Judging the marketplace section, I can gently concede that the majority of the participants of the low-paying signature campaigns/bounty programs/ are lacking on the quality part.

True, it's an ever growing business. And true, there are a lot of low quality posts, unfortunately.
But my point is that if you do this kind of ignore, you can easily miss out good (or great) posts just because somebody is not yet in a good/top campaign.
I prefer to put on ignore the 100% unrecoverable shitposters, for example, and just go on and read the rest.

As I said, I'll ignore most of those users, not all of them. I don't understand how these folks are related with the discussion. They aren't participants on any signature campaign last time I checked.

My bad. I somehow thought that the classification could put those without signature even lower than those with cheap signatures, by the logic that the worse shitposters may not get accepted even in the most worthless bounties.


However, the overall situation is imho quite complicated and "generalizing" by the signature one wears can give "incorrect results".
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
Woah. I'm here since 2014 and I've never done that!
Even if signature campaign was a thing 7 years ago, it wasn't the same as it is today. It's much more intense in the last 3 years, it's been seen as a real business. Judging the marketplace section, I can gently concede that the majority of the participants of the low-paying signature campaigns/bounty programs/ are lacking on the quality part.

An I'm sure you also don't do this 100%. Because that wold mean that you ignore the posts of gmaxwell or achow101
As I said, I'll ignore most of those users, not all of them. I don't understand how these folks are related with the discussion. They aren't participants on any signature campaign last time I checked.

I haven’t found any campaign which have a soft corner on this and gives a choice to the user if he want to post 1, 10 or 50 posts in a week. But not forcing on certain number of “must have” posts.
If you search a little bit more, you'll find them.
hero member
Activity: 2128
Merit: 532
FREE passive income eBook @ tinyurl.com/PIA10
The only problem I feel with signature campaigns is “must post xx number of posts in a week”. I wish if this limit was not there. This is the only reason that kills the quality. I haven’t found any campaign which have a soft corner on this and gives a choice to the user if he want to post 1, 10 or 50 posts in a week. But not forcing on certain number of “must have” posts.

We can see this on other social media platforms almost every other YouTube video includes a paid promotion or sponsored content but since the sponsors are not forcing the creators to post x number of videos in week. The quality of videos doesn’t drop significantly.

If we can some how convince the sponsors and campaign manager to don’t force this “x number of posts rules” or at least keep it bare minimum. I believe quality of posts may increase.

Can't blame the advertisers for setting such criteria. Having paying the participants on a weekly basis, surely they'd want to make the best of their budget. That's how business works.

I find that 25 a week is a sweet spot. Divided by 7 days, that averages to 3.5 a day. Not too demanding if you ask me.

If everyone simply posts like a few times per week, it's unfair for other participants due to the lack of rotation.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 4795
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
Why don't you ignore users?  Man,
Why don't you ignore users?  Man, my ignore list runs a mile long and I could probably add at least 50 new members to it if I were of the mind to do so.
I like reporting poor posts, and most or nearly all the reported posts are posts of newbies and poor posters. Also because I do not read all posts during many replies, I focus most on reading the ones that people in high-paying campaigns do post.

Why don't you ignore users?  Man,
What do you do with your list of "quality-posting users"?  Just curious.
A little mistake for not completing that accurately, not a list on a book that I meant, I do not write down usernames. I meant active members on this forum that will be very difficult for me to forget, I have their names off hand, which I like reading their post.

legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
I'll speak out my personal view about this, it may not be true for everyone. Once I read the replies of a thread, I'll ignore most of the users that participate on a low-paying signature campaign, by the thought that they are shit posters. But, that may not be true. I observe a form of prejudice. I'll actually take a closer look to a post made by a high-quality signature campaign participant rather than a newbie.

Woah. I'm here since 2014 and I've never done that!
I do ignore the badly formatted posts, I do ignore the posts that make no sense or they're badly translated, but I don't ignore/skip based on the signature campaign.

You imagine that if I would have done that I wold have ignored most of your posts?
Newer people may have potential. Newer people may do great posts before getting into the best signature campaigns?
An I'm sure you also don't do this 100%. Because that wold mean that you ignore the posts of gmaxwell or achow101  Wink   (sorry guys if I've triggered notification)
legendary
Activity: 2338
Merit: 10802
There are lies, damned lies and statistics. MTwain
<…>
I barely notice the signatures, since I’m used to visually skipping them when reading (I’d rather not use the hide feature though). The avatar is noticeable to me if unique to a user, by association over time, but are otherwise of no significance when reading a post.

What may happen is that I pay closer attention to some posts because of who wrote it, and that is probably based on the opinion one makes on the poster through having read a whole bunch of prior posts that I’ve considered interesting.
mk4
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 3873
Paldo.io 🤖
The way I look at it:

I personally truly love communicating in forums such as Bitcointalk, and I have no problem doing it all day. But would I do it if I wasn't getting paid? No. Not because money is the main motivation, but simply because I need to cut a lot of my Bitcointalk time into doing other stuff. Just like even though I love gaming so much that I could do it all day, playing DOTA2/CSGO 24/7 won't be able to pay my bills.
member
Activity: 211
Merit: 80
L0tt0.com
50/50.

I think that signature campaign is one of the highlights here in bounty hunting except for those who have great talent in programming that could do something else aside from joining signature bounty.There are still many things to consider whether to look signature bounty positively or negatively.

I had agree in your case OP, there are many high paying signature as I check in the services section and most of the hired members are actually good or quality posters but not all.

Few reasons why members now turning to quality posting rather than shitposting.

First, is that bounty manager wanted to run all projects handled to become successful. These mean that a good bounty manager will hired quality posters by checking member's merits and posting habits. Good bounty manager can identify fake merits earn which are some likely earn it by their alt accounts or some friends supporting them that made immediate rank up even at low activity.

Second, A member itself wanting to earn strive to get some merits by sharing quality, informative posts that will someday help him to get hired in a high paying bounty projects.

Third, that members itself has high intellectual capacity in the field of cryptocurrency or any related activities that help him showcase in his posts.Some are related to their educational attainment that we can even called them an expert. I have seen some concrete presentation from the statitician here showing graph with gathered data and their analysis that could be a reference someday or to someone that might be needing it in the future.

Fourth, members wanting a change in the forum by reporting, busting and help stop fraud activities. These stop other members to do shitposting to avoid getting reported and getting ban temp or permanently.

Well, having a good forum is ideal but we can't take out those fraud members here and they are always coming back even after gets busted. For now, I enjoyed the stay here in the forum and would most likely to enjoy if fraud and  other related activities will be lessen.
hero member
Activity: 2366
Merit: 793
Bitcoin = Financial freedom
I have the habit of looking at the avatars more than the signatures, and I remember some of the members in that way.

I don't hide anything and I don't ignore anyone's post unless they are trolling continuously, I just let them to be on my ignore list. Money os everything in this world and everyone is trying to get merit because they can join in better paying signature campaign which is really a bad thing in my opinion but in general its accepted by the community as long as it benefits the forum with good quality of posts compared to the past.
legendary
Activity: 2310
Merit: 4085
Farewell o_e_l_e_o
While I'm a strong believer that signature campaigns enrich this forum's quality and that “it keeps it alive”
Signature campaigns are part of promotions, advertisements of companies in the forum. They together help to bring more traffics for the forum but without them, the forum won't be a dead one. There are times the forum does not have signature and/ or avatar and it still survives so well.

Quote
Once I read the replies of a thread, I'll ignore most of the users that participate on a low-paying signature campaign, by the thought that they are shit posters. But, that may not be true. I observe a form of prejudice. I'll actually take a closer look to a post made by a high-quality signature campaign participant rather than a newbie.
It is your bias and any of us can have too (at somewhat extent).

I disagree if you say the quality of specific posts is decided by the campaigns they are participating in. A user who are in low-paid signature campaign or bounty can still make good or outstanding posts. It can be expanded to ranks, a newbie can make outstanding post as same as or even better than a Legendary member.

Generally, the average quality of post would be different (significantly) between participants of high-paid and low-paid signature campaigns. It would be more accurate if you generalize it from a total sample size of participants.

Quote
A user may have thousands of merits, but he/she may create low quality posts. Someone with 4-digits post count and 2-digits merit count would be quickly rejected into your mind, either because he/she may have promoted failed/scam tokens or made shitty posts for pennies.
It is related to posting style. If you spend 2 or 4 years to rank up, with due diligent efforts for your posts, your writing skills should be sharpened and better. Over years, it will become your habit to make good contributions with above-average quality posts. However, you always can make shit posts.
Pages:
Jump to: