Topic: Why do developer find it difficult to pay bounty hunters - page 5. (Read 778 times)

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.

I guess before the bounty hunters were doing their job and i thought they have understood about this. The result of how much bounty will depend on how much raised by the project itself. and so far there was so many platforms are still paid bounty hunters wil full amount of allocation which was giving an example if there was still a reliable project that can be trusted.

Bounty hunters take part in projects exclusively at their own peril and risk and at the same time I have a list of duties and almost zero rights, and both the hunter and the developer understand this.
Developers do not pay because he (or them) will not do anything for it, no punishment
"they can change the rules anytime" - removes all responsibility in advance

I guess you are referring to which project  . I decided to quit and did not expect their reward anymore. This is one of worst project I have ever participated in.  What a "most potential" project!!!

Because the tokens that are not pay to bounty hunters will be turned to developers wallets. Then they will have more money, because they are real shits in cryptocurrency space and they don't care about market, community, their project, products, development. They only care about money in their wallets. That's all.

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.

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 .