Topic: What is the best criteria to judge a good bounty - page 7. (Read 884 times)
The quality of current bounty activities is declining. If you want to get a very good project through bounty and hold it for a long time, it is basically impossible. As long as you can complete the currency, it is better.
While some bounty hunters lay more emphasis on the community members of the project. I tend to look at the technical aspect of the Whitepaper, website structure and team because I have seen a lot of projects with large communities failed.
I have done bounty and airdrop.Ok. I already realize that have a lot of scam both bounty and airdrop.
So when I join airdrop and bounty, I check very clearly with bounty, and airdrop is a little.
- About airdrop:
+ I usually check about this project have app. Without, I will check DEV team, and presentation on their website. Moreover, I care to communicate on telegram, twitter, bounty.
- About bounty:
+ I also check same airdrop but more clearly. Add, I will active pm with amount of one our DEV to verified Have they joined or worked with this project?
Special, I think in order to that project thrive. Their technology must very very good , It must be applied in practice. I usually prioritize some projects mention or have platform about advanced technology.
I have been joining on bounty campaign since last year and based on my experienced i chose the bounty program or project simply by having a good white paper, website and a devoted team members and a CEO. And sometimes even if that project have that all criteria, they failed and scammed people like the other bounty.
A very large criterion is a certain background of the team and the project as a whole, if there is something to learn, it is always more interesting to consider.
Whitepaper and an existing working product is a very important factor in choosing a good ICO bounty plus a big bounty pool and handled by a trusted campaign manager of the forum that is my criteria for judging a good bounty.
it is true the community can support the project but not necessarily the project is good, because I think we should see from the concept and potential of the project and read whitepaper also the team behind it can influence the success of their project
My evaluation criteria are pretty simple, see if their whitepaper is feasible, whether the founders can afford it, the funds they invest, the reputable ICO rating group
Whitepaper is certainly an important document by which we can judge the project, it is also worth evaluating the site and the team, it is no less important components of the success of the project. Despite the fact that many projects that have a fairly large community turned out to be a fraud, it still affects the project positively, the more people the better. Personally, I'm looking for those projects whose developers are already working with quite well-known and established players in any technical or social services.
You are trying to look deeper into the project, which is a nice thing. You can learn a lot from the structure of the whitepaper and the website, the words and phrases used tells a LOT.
Otherwise, check their team, their connections, try to judge how credible and competent they may be.
Their telegram channel is worth checking, but rather for the replies of the team.
Evaluate the idea behind the project, and after all these, you might know where to invest.
Otherwise, check their team, their connections, try to judge how credible and competent they may be.
Their telegram channel is worth checking, but rather for the replies of the team.
Evaluate the idea behind the project, and after all these, you might know where to invest.
While some bounty hunters lay more emphasis on the community members of the project. I tend to look at the technical aspect of the Whitepaper, website structure and team because I have seen a lot of projects with large communities failed.
As long as it is not associated with token suite then you have lower risks of being paid according to your efforts. Most campaigns associated with token suites often fails to give rewards and turns out to be a scam so I suggest you stay away from these bounty platforms.
While some bounty hunters lay more emphasis on the community members of the project. I tend to look at the technical aspect of the Whitepaper, website structure and team because I have seen a lot of projects with large communities failed.
I do used the following criteria to judge good bounties: white papers, teams and existing structures. If you can find good information about this three others criteria will be secondary. I have also find out that the team matter the most because without good team no matter the write-up and structure, the projects will still fail.
For me, the criterion of a good bounty is a good and necessary project idea, strong and detailed WP and known or at least proven experienced team. When I'm too lazy to study the technical project intricacies, I just choose a bounty campaign proven managers who either have a low scam percentage or haven't at all. Such managers usually care about their reputation and won't take any projects into work simply because they are paid for it in bitcoin or fiat (not in tokens)
The choice of bounty should be approached as seriously as the choice of ICO, so as not to waste your time. To get acquainted with the company's website, to evaluate the usefulness of their products, to see the road map
I would say it is not enough to just look at the technology or the community, it should really have both. At ICO stage it is impossible to tell as the community has not been built yet. The project team is the most important, then after that see if it is a deliverable project or going to be a failed ICO
While some bounty hunters lay more emphasis on the community members of the project. I tend to look at the technical aspect of the Whitepaper, website structure and team because I have seen a lot of projects with large communities failed.
You are very much right with projects having large communities that have failed. As for me, i look at track records of previous bounties organised by the bounty manager before making conclusions as to the success of the bounty/project. Although, large communities are beneficial to projects in some ways; however most projects with large communities bought their way through via airdrops.
Just like an ICO, you gotta check the supply of coins (1%? 2%? for bounties), Token value potential, the capability of the team to deliver that value, etc.
The difference is: you are not going to invest money. Instead, you are investing your time, which is another valuable resource, into that ICO.
The difference is: you are not going to invest money. Instead, you are investing your time, which is another valuable resource, into that ICO.
a bounty of success is not only seen in Whitepaper or kamunitasnya, if I want to follow the bounty/ ICO, usually I ask "how many tokens have been sold?" or I see on the website, If the token sold has reached the soft hat, I will invest or follow the prize in the project.
The best criterion for choosing a bounty is the idea, it should be viable and useful. Then pay attention to the team, the team must be realistic and meet the objectives of the project.
it is true the community can support the project but not necessarily the project is good, because I think we should see from the concept and potential of the project and read whitepaper also the team behind it can influence the success of their project
It's really hard to find good bounty now, but it still possible. For example you can chack bountyhive or amazix this two places with good bounty's imho. ALso I recoomend you to participate in bounty programms wich Sylon as a bounty manager.
I think the main idea of project. Because , people first check for the idea for understand bounty. So, most important criteria is idea for me.
Jump to: