Topic: Why do developer find it difficult to pay bounty hunters - page 4. (Read 754 times)
There are bounty hunters living in countries where jurisdictions are unclear or outright illegal to obtain crypto. As such, there are many bounty programs conducting KYC procedures - which brought the attention to the fact that there were actually too many people abusing the bounty programs - creating duplicate accounts, fake entries, fake accounts, etc.
So all in all, what goes around comes around?
Now bounty hunters have developed very tense relations with ICO projects, because the ICO team inscribes such clauses into the conditions of joining their project, which from a legal point of view are generally illegal, since they arbitrarily allow any changes by one party to the transaction. There are wines in this and bounty hunters who join the project, even without delving particularly into the text of the terms of the agreement. This enables unscrupulous ICO teams to abuse their rights. This should be changed now or will be changed already when states begin to regulate this type of activity.
Because they know they'll get away with it. Developers care little that someone has spent a lot of time on their favorite product. They are ready to save on everything and everyone. So far, there are no regulators that would protect the rights of the bounty. I only hope that such projects will not live long. Bad always comes back and greed sometimes very quickly finished with the team. A good team with a good project usually pays for the work of the bounty. I hope that the old days will return and we still earn our 
Only reason why they are getting away is because there are not enough complains for not receiving payouts. In one regular bounty campaign there are more than thousand hunters I think if all these people start not only complaining but spread word that they were scammed, these projects will lose their costumers in short time and it will be in their best interest to send payments then. Looking at the situation at hand now in cryptocurrency bounty hunting case, we could all see that bounty hunter has turn to a cage of war between dev and hunter these days and that really gives me concern.
Doing bounty does mean that bounty hunters are useless or something cause the way and manner developers are handling hunters now gives a very wrong signal and I see this technology as a way forward for all not a mix to scam people or get rich over night.
Though the technology is decentralized and more why we are having issue as the developer can't be sue or sue , so any bounty that hunters participate in is not a contract as we do have a clause in the terms which says " the team can change the rules any anytime " which make the whole contract useless and not legal as both party have right to decide what is good for the project after the first agreement is sign and if there must be a change them there must be an agreement between the two party not that one party will just decide on what he think will favour him alone and will now point out to the clause that say " they can change the rules anytime"
Imagine a project who lock bounty reward for 90days base on agreement and even after that time they never release it and keep posting the hunters.
Imagine a project that assign 3% of the total supply to hunters and only used 1% and after the hard work of the hunters completing the task stipulated in the rules , the team change the rules and reduce the reward from 1% to 0.07% , like the real reward is 1M and was reduce to 70,000 for all bounty hunters .
Allowing this type of things happening and going Scott free is dmagi g the image of this great technology and making it look to newbies as a scam when many are still agitating and we that are in this space still give them chance to bad mouth our great community which I think need a very urgent attention to curb all scam project .
Because they know they'll get away with it. Developers care little that someone has spent a lot of time on their favorite product. They are ready to save on everything and everyone. So far, there are no regulators that would protect the rights of the bounty. I only hope that such projects will not live long. Bad always comes back and greed sometimes very quickly finished with the team. A good team with a good project usually pays for the work of the bounty. I hope that the old days will return and we still earn our Doing bounty does mean that bounty hunters are useless or something cause the way and manner developers are handling hunters now gives a very wrong signal and I see this technology as a way forward for all not a mix to scam people or get rich over night.
Though the technology is decentralized and more why we are having issue as the developer can't be sue or sue , so any bounty that hunters participate in is not a contract as we do have a clause in the terms which says " the team can change the rules any anytime " which make the whole contract useless and not legal as both party have right to decide what is good for the project after the first agreement is sign and if there must be a change them there must be an agreement between the two party not that one party will just decide on what he think will favour him alone and will now point out to the clause that say " they can change the rules anytime"
Imagine a project who lock bounty reward for 90days base on agreement and even after that time they never release it and keep posting the hunters.
Imagine a project that assign 3% of the total supply to hunters and only used 1% and after the hard work of the hunters completing the task stipulated in the rules , the team change the rules and reduce the reward from 1% to 0.07% , like the real reward is 1M and was reduce to 70,000 for all bounty hunters .
Allowing this type of things happening and going Scott free is dmagi g the image of this great technology and making it look to newbies as a scam when many are still agitating and we that are in this space still give them chance to bad mouth our great community which I think need a very urgent attention to curb all scam project .
Now this topic is especially important, because many projects use the fact that the rules prescribe the point that they can change the rules at any time. Many agree to send far away such projects, but many bounty hunters are willing to work for any rules and for any money potamu that$ 20 in their country a lot of money
I see the reason to be the intention to scam bounty hunters. A reliable project will be upright from the beginning to distribution of tokens but if they are shitty, they keep giving excuses and eventually not pay up.
by not paying bounty hunters means that the project has shown itself to be a scam, the development team will pay and seriously if they really want to develop their tokens in the future, the bounty hunter is like a double-edged knife, bounty hunters are very useful to help make ico and bounty hunters can destroy the image of a project that is difficult to pay Not all bounty programs did not pay bounty hunters, many did. But what is there is that there seems to be more developers with scam intent than before.
Today it is possible to notice also that many eminent bounty the managers have ceased to accompany ISO in protest against the conditions obviously foreshadowing the failure.
I believe any team who wants to make an ICO needs sufficient fund for bounty hunters to pay. Project can not be enough funded or may not hit the soft cap, this doesn't means that they gonna pay nothing for the work. I have done some bounty which does not able to catch softcap, but they have pay compensation payment for their bounty hunters.
I don't know what is reason behind this but it isn't good practice and if this practice continues bounty hunters need to protest and stop promoting ico. Maybe they didn't raise enough funds but that isn't any ones problem. I don't see reason why they don't want to send tokens, it cost them only fee for transaction.
Quite simply, a bad project party did not receive a large amount of investment funds, which would cause problems in the development team's funds, they would choose not to pay and cause ICO to fail. All investors will fail and investment in ICO must be cautious.
Well its not like they are going to pay using the funds collected but the tokens actually. But still if the team has no intention of listing the token in an exchange there goes again for the contract to be useless. There ain't no use of asking for escrow either because bounty hunters quickly get into joining a bounty campaign without it. I have completed a campaign but not getting paid too like the PayPro.
Not all bounty programs did not pay bounty hunters, many did. But what is there is that there seems to be more developers with scam intent than before.
I see the reason to be the intention to scam bounty hunters. A reliable project will be upright from the beginning to distribution of tokens but if they are shitty, they keep giving excuses and eventually not pay up.
I don't know if they'll do it out of malice, but many times it's not directly their fault if a project fails, many projects are in red because they don't receive enough funds for their realization, that's why they can't pay the bounty hunters and they have to extend the final date of the project, haven't you noticed that the ICOs that are coming out no longer have a definite closing date? they just say "when the soft cap is complete".
Looking at the situation at hand now in cryptocurrency bounty hunting case, we could all see that bounty hunter has turn to a cage of war between dev and hunter these days and that really gives me concern.
Doing bounty does mean that bounty hunters are useless or something cause the way and manner developers are handling hunters now gives a very wrong signal and I see this technology as a way forward for all not a mix to scam people or get rich over night.
Though the technology is decentralized and more why we are having issue as the developer can't be sue or sue , so any bounty that hunters participate in is not a contract as we do have a clause in the terms which says " the team can change the rules any anytime " which make the whole contract useless and not legal as both party have right to decide what is good for the project after the first agreement is sign and if there must be a change them there must be an agreement between the two party not that one party will just decide on what he think will favour him alone and will now point out to the clause that say " they can change the rules anytime"
Imagine a project who lock bounty reward for 90days base on agreement and even after that time they never release it and keep posting the hunters.
Imagine a project that assign 3% of the total supply to hunters and only used 1% and after the hard work of the hunters completing the task stipulated in the rules , the team change the rules and reduce the reward from 1% to 0.07% , like the real reward is 1M and was reduce to 70,000 for all bounty hunters .
Allowing this type of things happening and going Scott free is dmagi g the image of this great technology and making it look to newbies as a scam when many are still agitating and we that are in this space still give them chance to bad mouth our great community which I think need a very urgent attention to curb all scam project .
I totally agree with you. When joining an ICO generosity campaign, there should be no indication that they have the right to change any rules at any time at their discretion. This makes it completely meaningless then to join, because at any time they can write that they simply don’t want to pay out the tokens earned by the participants of the ICO generosity campaign and will proceed according to the terms of the connection. This should not be. From a legal point of view, such a document is illegal.Doing bounty does mean that bounty hunters are useless or something cause the way and manner developers are handling hunters now gives a very wrong signal and I see this technology as a way forward for all not a mix to scam people or get rich over night.
Though the technology is decentralized and more why we are having issue as the developer can't be sue or sue , so any bounty that hunters participate in is not a contract as we do have a clause in the terms which says " the team can change the rules any anytime " which make the whole contract useless and not legal as both party have right to decide what is good for the project after the first agreement is sign and if there must be a change them there must be an agreement between the two party not that one party will just decide on what he think will favour him alone and will now point out to the clause that say " they can change the rules anytime"
Imagine a project who lock bounty reward for 90days base on agreement and even after that time they never release it and keep posting the hunters.
Imagine a project that assign 3% of the total supply to hunters and only used 1% and after the hard work of the hunters completing the task stipulated in the rules , the team change the rules and reduce the reward from 1% to 0.07% , like the real reward is 1M and was reduce to 70,000 for all bounty hunters .
Allowing this type of things happening and going Scott free is dmagi g the image of this great technology and making it look to newbies as a scam when many are still agitating and we that are in this space still give them chance to bad mouth our great community which I think need a very urgent attention to curb all scam project .
In this case, the forum administration should establish general rules for the ICO teams in order to exclude the use of actually slave labor of bounty hunters.
Whether the project is successful or not, bounty hunter rewards should be paid. Otherwise, the bounty hunter worked hard for several months. No reward? So who will pay for the time cost of bounty hunters?
projects have a problem with payments because they cannot raise enough money on pre-sale/public sale, and if they don’t find money, they will not pay out of their own pocket. So you need to watch at the soft cap or hard cap
I think we need to be realistic here, some people expect a project to raise $2million and pay them $500k or $1 million in bounty, this is not possible since most projects now are having difficulties rasing fund and the change in attitute towards overvaluation of projects, bounty quota too have changed. I know some projects are difficult when it comes to this that is why you need to join campaigns that you have trust in the campaign manager
It depends on the project as how good it is if the project reaches the soft cap assume that the project is successful. Check their previous projects and their achievements, if the ICO's fail do you believe that they will pay? As simple as that.
The softcap project, they will definitely pay the bounty hunter but the budget will drop a lot compared to the original estimate. Hardcap projects are the best projects and make bounty hunters the happiest
We now have developers with malicious intent to fraud, scam and run away after dumping tokens during ico
which is why there is every need to be smart and calm while finding new bounties to participate in.
Dont mix it up and don't be in an hurry, make comprehensive researches and get your decisions spot on as wel.
Remember, it is wrong to promote false projects.
which is why there is every need to be smart and calm while finding new bounties to participate in.
Dont mix it up and don't be in an hurry, make comprehensive researches and get your decisions spot on as wel.
Remember, it is wrong to promote false projects.
I think that the only question is greed, because in most cases, developers just leave and eventually lose not only their reputation but also, as a result, the ability to do something good for the world and people.
Jump to: