When Bounties are not worth the effort - Limit the numbers - page 4.

StGermain

member

Activity: 224

Merit: 14

QuickX ICO

Quote from: magle on February 08, 2018, 07:51:08 AM

It is important to note that signature bounties, is not something you are supposed to live off.

You should think of it as a small extra bonus for just participating on the forum out of your interest.

Can´t agree with that. As far as I am concerned, the ICO is taking advantage of my knowledge and reputation, and that is an asset that I do not give away for free.

StGermain

member

Activity: 224

Merit: 14

QuickX ICO

Quote from: De_nis on February 08, 2018, 06:34:57 AM

Quote from: paxmao on February 08, 2018, 06:23:31 AM

I have observed that many ICOs that have a signature bounty campaign end up not being worth due to the huge number of participants. I think that ICOs should limit the number of signature participants to avoid a disappointed community. ICO campaign managers could probably advise their clients about it.

I have seen only one ICO at the moment that provides a limited number of people in the signature campaign and also a fixed payment in USD for each rank. I think that is a fair way of promoting for everyone.

I also noticed that the more the company says that it spends bounty, the more likely that the purpose of this company is only dishonest gain!

There is a limit in credibility I agree. If ICO discounts are above 20% or the bounty is only for referrals or is more than 5% I would tend to think that they are not playing it well.

StGermain

member

Activity: 224

Merit: 14

QuickX ICO

Quote from: Lerikaweb on February 08, 2018, 06:30:44 AM

It is extremely unprofitable for ICOs:) this is why they will not make such a limitation. If you are disappointed with what you receive for a campaign - it is always up to you not to take it. Start trading on the stock or do whatever else you will be happy with

and ICOs need as much advertising as possible for the same token amount. So limitation of participants' number will make ad campaign less efficient, but more expensive.

The problem is that once you have been posting on a campaign you have made an effort, so I do subscribe the point of the OP.

Ostonian

full member

Activity: 912

Merit: 100

I completely agree that managers should somehow limit the number of participants in the bounty campaign. Because, like and allocate not a small amount of money to the bounty campaign, but in the end, because of the large number of participants it turns out to earn a penny.

magle

member

Activity: 280

Merit: 10

It is important to note that signature bounties, is not something you are supposed to live off.

You should think of it as a small extra bonus for just participating on the forum out of your interest.

Don Stefanello

newbie

Activity: 182

Merit: 0

Yeah i think that there are plenty of ICOs that have limitations, and as well you should be the one deciding to join them or not, i have noticed a lot of them are promising much more money than they are really giving to the bounty, they are playing the card that bounty hunters will just join and not even check the project

Cnut237

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1277

Quote from: paxmao on February 08, 2018, 06:23:31 AM

I have observed that many ICOs that have a signature bounty campaign end up not being worth due to the huge number of participants. I think that ICOs should limit the number of signature participants to avoid a disappointed community. ICO campaign managers could probably advise their clients about it.

I have seen only one ICO at the moment that provides a limited number of people in the signature campaign and also a fixed payment in USD for each rank. I think that is a fair way of promoting for everyone.

It is a trade-off between how many people should be rewarded, and how much they should be rewarded, and this is the company's decision to make. It is in their best interests to maximise the number of participants as that gives them more exposure. For various reasons they might limit the number of participants, but again this is entirely up to the company concerned. It is essentially a freelance marketplace. The company sets the terms, and prospective workers decide whether or not to accept those terms.

Usui-Kun

member

Activity: 224

Merit: 10

Streamity Decentralized cryptocurrency exchange

Since the rules about the merit system started, it is not easy now to climb up the ranks and actually have the perks of having higher rank. The new ones will have to work their way to have a substantial amount of shares or stakes which is a good thing for the companies that will conduct bounties.

aceptamosbitcoin

hero member

Activity: 981

Merit: 503

Quote from: paxmao on February 08, 2018, 06:23:31 AM

I have observed that many ICOs that have a signature bounty campaign end up not being worth due to the huge number of participants. I think that ICOs should limit the number of signature participants to avoid a disappointed community. ICO campaign managers could probably advise their clients about it.

I have seen only one ICO at the moment that provides a limited number of people in the signature campaign and also a fixed payment in USD for each rank. I think that is a fair way of promoting for everyone.

It's pointless for the ICO's itself. Just supports projects you like and plan to hold tokens for a while.

They are giving a hard %%% of sales. The more participants = better for ICO's.

badykvik

sr. member

Activity: 895

Merit: 250

This is a simple analogy in my own case. I just don't involve in any bounty whether by limited participants or not. I use to quickly put up a simple research into whether the Bounty worth stressing for of not. After my simple test, I shun it on discovering it does not worth it.

ramini

member

Activity: 126

Merit: 11

ICO Starting on 1st of April

Quote from: paxmao on February 08, 2018, 06:23:31 AM

I have observed that many ICOs that have a signature bounty campaign end up not being worth due to the huge number of participants. I think that ICOs should limit the number of signature participants to avoid a disappointed community. ICO campaign managers could probably advise their clients about it.

I have seen only one ICO at the moment that provides a limited number of people in the signature campaign and also a fixed payment in USD for each rank. I think that is a fair way of promoting for everyone.

I don't agree that the large numbers of participants is the main cause of ICOs failure because the fact that the more participants of a bounty campaign will be the more advantage because participants are wearing ICOs signatures and it will help them advertise ICOs and most of the cases they will succeed and more likely will hit hard capital.
It's otherwise less bounty participants could led into hot hitting soft and hard capital because too few members are wearing their signature and their ICO will fail because advertising isn't enough.

neinnein125

sr. member

Activity: 475

Merit: 251

VTOS

I somekinda keep experiencing this too. There are many new icos that accepts huge number of participants for bounty. That basically kills the purpose. I tend to join best bounties I believe but coins I get aren't really worth.

Freezingel

sr. member

Activity: 574

Merit: 251

They prefer more participants because they want more coverage for their project so of course more participants is welcome. As a bounty hunter you should check first and try to count how much you'll get, sometimes it's not worth to enter a campaign where the participant already a lot even though it's a good project.

yndye

sr. member

Activity: 616

Merit: 262

The one who are implementing the ICOs would like it if there are more people who would participate in their campaign so I think it would be a disadvantage to them if they would limit it. It may be the prerogative of the bounty manager if he wants to limit the participants in the campaign because it is an additional job in his part if there are more participants. You have an option to participate in campaigns paid in bitcoin because they are limited but then you have to be fast to get a spot because within just minutes the slots may be immediately filled except for those managers who will choose those people who have quality post because it takes some time for the slots to be filled up.

Tynovten_

full member

Activity: 420

Merit: 101

As I've been following when the manager has restricted the signature campaign participants. Beside that sylon and yahoo as i know limit the participants. So the division is consistent as in the agreement. It seems that the restriction was only done by some bounty manager

cryptopusa

member

Activity: 224

Merit: 11

Quote from: paxmao on February 08, 2018, 06:23:31 AM

I have observed that many ICOs that have a signature bounty campaign end up not being worth due to the huge number of participants. I think that ICOs should limit the number of signature participants to avoid a disappointed community. ICO campaign managers could probably advise their clients about it.

I have seen only one ICO at the moment that provides a limited number of people in the signature campaign and also a fixed payment in USD for each rank. I think that is a fair way of promoting for everyone.

I agree due to large number of participants the bounty campaigns sisnt that much profitable compare to last year's rewards.Campaign Managers should do something about it they can implement the first come first serve basis in accepting participants so the campaign is worth the hussle.

SiDtHeBeSt

full member

Activity: 420

Merit: 106

I think most bounty campaigns set a fixed amount.of payment either in Bitcoins, Ethereum or a specific amount of their own tokens and the amount varies according to the ranks. I don't think there are much campaigns who don't follow this and let alot of people in. As far as I've seen alot of these campaigns allow around 200 participants in total to join. I think we just need to be careful and try to avoid joining the campaigns which don't seem to be good.
But there are surely some spam campaigns which allow alot of members, which shouldn't be allowed.

VanDeinsberg12

hero member

Activity: 1540

Merit: 507

Quote from: paxmao on February 08, 2018, 06:23:31 AM

I have observed that many ICOs that have a signature bounty campaign end up not being worth due to the huge number of participants. I think that ICOs should limit the number of signature participants to avoid a disappointed community. ICO campaign managers could probably advise their clients about it.

I have seen only one ICO at the moment that provides a limited number of people in the signature campaign and also a fixed payment in USD for each rank. I think that is a fair way of promoting for everyone.

That's indeed, but merit system already prevented those spammers. Look at envion project which has been filled with so many junior members and newbies.
More than 1300 participants.

But that depends on your rank but I think that the manager should try to apply more strict rules. I see someone that gives the limitation seat to the signature campaign.

emmmmm

member

Activity: 210

Merit: 10

The Experience Layer of the Decentralized Internet

But I think you just want to get more bounty.
Because for an ICO project, more participants mean more people to advertise for them, and the bounty they give is certain, so why limit it? Huh

Gabmot

member

Activity: 686

Merit: 11

This theory of yours is actually logical and true. Due to problems like those you mentioned, payouts are not up to tasks done. Well, I think so many incoming ICOs are trying to nip that in the bud by restraining the rank system to start from member or Full member rank. I just hope it worked out like that

Topic: When Bounties are not worth the effort - Limit the numbers - page 4. (Read 677 times)