Signature campaigns & forum earning discussion thread.

[bitbit97]

Looking at their campaign, it seems to be a trial run. They only have 9 participants (excluding manager) which is much fewer than most of other campaigns (i.e. coinomize currently has 55). They also have tracker links, so will be able to monitor traffic coming in from this forum. Interested to see how it'll play out and will they decide to expand the campaign.
Nevertheless, it's a good sign.

If I was a manager of some campaign I would choose smaller number of members, but I would make sure they are all quality posters and I would increase payrate.
I don't see any point in hiring spammers and people who write low value posts and don't contribute anything to forum conversation.

I also agree we must concentrate on quality rather than quantity, we will eventually get a good rate since the increase in activity happened just at the start of this year and many more members of Bitcointalk are teleporting here I am satisfied with the rate I just hope I can keep up and many more platforms will pick Altcoinstalks fort their promotion.
I want to see popular casinos launching campaigns here if they launch a long-term campaign here then we can say that Altcoinstalk really level up

I think standards are a bit higher in bitcointalk forum and there is more quality discussion there, at least for now.
Sponsors and managers are probably thinking that if something is working they should not change it and experiment.

While you discuss quality of posters and suggest quality over quantity tactics, you have forgotten about such thing as variety. The most members are in campaign, the more different opinions they could have. What is the point of having only 5-10 members, when half of them discuss one and the same thing, have similar vision of things. They make discussion boring or it will go to a dead end someday. While 20+ members can build a real discussion between each other as minimum. It will attract more attention to topic, search engines, signature and project recognition.

What do you think about such option?

[dkbit98]

While you discuss quality of posters and suggest quality over quantity tactics, you have forgotten about such thing as variety. The most members are in campaign, the more different opinions they could have. What is the point of having only 5-10 members, when half of them discuss one and the same thing, have similar vision of things. They make discussion boring or it will go to a dead end someday. While 20+ members can build a real discussion between each other as minimum. It will attract more attention to topic, search engines, signature and project recognition.

I think this is a bunch of bollocks.
It's not true that quality members are talking about one and the same things, this is an insult to all of them.
If they are boring to you than maybe you have much bigger problems if you find conversation from spammers more interesting. 
Welcome to my ignore list.

[bitbit97]

Before making that comment, you would better open any thread that has 50+ pages minimum and go through all of them. If you would have done it, you have noticed that in general a bunch of 5-10 users discuss one and the same thing all the time.

You probably know how advertisement work only from one side of the coin. From your point of view, you would better hire one person, who would post wall of text and pay him, then instead hire 3 or 5 members who would make brand more noticeable.

P.S. I was never planning to offend or insult you with my post, but it looks like you have taken things personal and showed weakness. Good luck then, bye and have a wonderful day.

[examplens]

You probably know how advertisement work only from one side of the coin. From your point of view, you would better hire one person, who would post wall of text and pay him, then instead hire 3 or 5 members who would make brand more noticeable.

This is a completely wrong view of the matter.
It makes a big difference if the discussion you read makes sense and adds some value. More attention is being paid to it, and thus to the ads that come with it.
Some uninteresting and endless discussions will certainly not attract attention, therefore the promotion of something will be ignored.

Likewise, the human psyche will connect the brand you promote with what you write. If you write spam and useless posts, whoever reads them will characterize the brand from your signature as such.

[bitbit97]

Then I dont know nor understand how promotion work. Then I ask for explanation, why in situation when the manager has gone through users posting history, selected those who are eligible and make quality post, he should decrease number of campaign members and choose only «most quality poster among quality posters» and pay him more. Then maybe it is better to disband all participants, choose only one and pay him $500-1000 per week, just because he most famous poster on the whole forum and grab all the attention?

[examplens]

Then maybe it is better to disband all participants, choose only one and pay him $500-1000 per week, just because he most famous poster on the whole forum and grab all the attention?

- It is quite possible that there is more than one quality poster.
- Aren't all campaigns limited to a certain number of participants? Some of them have 10-15 participants, according to your understanding, they should halve the payment rate to hire another 10-15 participants.
- Even on the Altt forum there are custom deals where members are paid a fixed amount, regardless of the number of posts.
- There are deals on Btt that you mention. I don't know the exact amount, it may be under $1000 a week, but it's not a negligible amount. And yes, the posts of such users attract much more attention than some nonsense.

[bitbit97]

My original post was related to dkbit98 wish to reduce number of participants in one campaign, but increase their payments. I dont understand why it is going to work. That is why I have posted with irony, that wont it  be better than to hire only 1 instead of reducing?

I dont understand following situation. Projects wants to run a promotional signature campaign to get recognition, new clients. Bounty managers create thread and users post there applications. Manager goes through the list of applications and choose appropriate ones. How ever, dkbit98 suggests to decrease number of already selected participants (because " they are spammers and people who write low value posts and don't contribute anything to forum conversation.") and increase rate.

How is that going to help project to get more recognition? Because the best among best always attract more attention? Then comes my post with irony. Why not then select a God among best of the best and pay him all the money?

Further even more questions rises from me. If there is that one unique member (or few), who he (they) would talk to then? Most effective and quality poster can not post an effective and quality post if he talks with spammers and low quality posters only. I hope that is clear. Then this turns into a bunch of people (those selected quality posters) only talking among each others. How that is going to help project?

[examplens]

Then this turns into a bunch of people (those selected quality posters) only talking among each others. How that is going to help project?

I have the impression that you are contradicting yourself for a moment, but can you give an example of what I quoted above?

[bitbit97]

Then this turns into a bunch of people (those selected quality posters) only talking among each others. How that is going to help project?

I have the impression that you are contradicting yourself for a moment, but can you give an example of what I quoted above?

Please point where it sounds controversial or I am contradicting myself and I will rephrase that. English is not my native language.

My points were:
1. Decreasing amount of signature participants, but increasing payment rate for those who are left isnt helpful for project that is promoted in signature.
2. Fewer participants, shorten specter of topic to be discussed.

I dont know what should I reply to you about those 4 points you have asked me.

1. I never supported idea of decreasing amount of participants of signature campaign. dbkbit98 wanted to decrease them.
2. Did I really said that? That BM should add more members and decrease current members reward in half? Point please where I have said that.
3. Dont understand what should I comment on here
4. Please point where I have mentioned BTT.

I will try to make it more clear.

Lets say we have a budget of $1000 per week. BM accepts 20 participants with $50/w payment. The campaign receives 100 applications, but BM selects only best 20 among them. dkbit98 suggest to decrease number of participants to 5 or 10, and pay them $200/w or 100$/w, when I suggest to keep those 20 because they would make discussion/conversation/posting on the forum more rich. As a joke, I have asked wont it be better instead to accept just 1 member and pay him $1000/w because his posting is way better than those 19 ?

[Don Pedro Dinero]

What do you think about this new rule introduced by yahoo62278?

Payments were sent to everyone, there are no open spots this week. I did add a new rule that 1 post MUST be in the winz.io announcement thread. I asked if it was allowed before deciding to add the rule, and it is. This isn't bitcointalk. Failure to follow this new rule will result in no payment.

I've been hesitating whether to comment in the Altcoinstalks Signature Campaign Observer thread, but I think this one is better suited for that matter.

Now the question I have is whether this will induce a copycat effect in the other campaigns, and whether it will lead to spamming the Anns of the services being advertised. I'm not saying it will but it's certainly a possibility.

I myself have commented on the Ann thead of the service I advertise but if I had to do it compulsorily at least 1 time a week to get paid, I'm not saying I would shitpost but surely what I would say would be more generic. Let's multiply that by all the members of the campaign.

[yahoo62278]

What do you think about this new rule introduced by yahoo62278?

Payments were sent to everyone, there are no open spots this week. I did add a new rule that 1 post MUST be in the winz.io announcement thread. I asked if it was allowed before deciding to add the rule, and it is. This isn't bitcointalk. Failure to follow this new rule will result in no payment.

I've been hesitating whether to comment in the Altcoinstalks Signature Campaign Observer thread, but I think this one is better suited for that matter.

Now the question I have is whether this will induce a copycat effect in the other campaigns, and whether it will lead to spamming the Anns of the services being advertised. I'm not saying it will but it's certainly a possibility.

I myself have commented on the Ann thead of the service I advertise but if I had to do it compulsorily at least 1 time a week to get paid, I'm not saying I would shitpost but surely what I would say would be more generic. Let's multiply that by all the members of the campaign.

I personally believe that users should want to help a service that has hired them. Apparently, users do not care who hired them though, only thing that they care about is getting paid.

Do I want to encourage spam in the announcement threads? No, I want to encourage engagement. I want to encourage users to actually visit the site and look around. I want users to say some negative or positive things about the company to help them improve.

[bitbit97]

This might encourage people to post fake info. Not everyone that wear a gambling signature gambles on the platform or gambles at all. I would be good if people would share their experience with winz.io, but I feel like people would go and post something like "I have played game X, I won, I like that game and winz", which wont look organic.

Similar rule was once in one of crypto projects signature campaigns on no link to CT and people mostly go to topic and post a question, when the answer could easily be found in FAQ. Or they never came to read reply or show any engagement. If week started from Monday, then topic was active for few days only; participants made their obligatory post and return in a week.

Such rules is useful from promotion point of view, but from users it will look like forcing to do something. And from my experience, when someone is forced to do something (especially when people are used to freedom), quality suffers greatly.

[examplens]

What do you think about this new rule introduced by yahoo62278?

Payments were sent to everyone, there are no open spots this week. I did add a new rule that 1 post MUST be in the winz.io announcement thread. I asked if it was allowed before deciding to add the rule, and it is. This isn't bitcointalk. Failure to follow this new rule will result in no payment.

I would not condition the payment with this rule, but I would keep in the campaign only those who actively participate in the discussion of the brand they are promoting. It can happen to me for a week when I can't constructively participate in a thread and I don't want to spam. I shouldn't be punished for that.

Also, It is not logical for someone to promote a certain brand without knowing anything about it.

I saw it quite a few times on Btt, I think I wrote about it. As an example, in the Bestchange campaign where for more than 4 years, only 7 (out of 25) campaign participants wrote at least one post in their ANN. At the same time, everyone is quite active in the signature thread when discussing why the payment is one day late or why the fee for the payment transaction was set too low.

[paid2]

I agree with examplens, this could be positive in the sense that it would avoid the situation we had on the other forum in the Sinbad campaign, where a participant asked "what is a BTC mixer" after several months of running campaign..

At the same time, once a week per participant is clearly too much. It's easier for a casino than for a mixer, for example. If a business is doing well and not producing new products, it's going to be difficult for some members to stick to 1 post a week. You might as well just ask for bumps from your participants, at least their ANN won't be polluted by meaningless and uninteresting messages...

[dkbit98]

Making a rule that members must create posts in topic of service they are advertising in signature campaign can only result in filling that topic with bunch of spam and worthless posts.
This is the opposite end of not making any posts in topic and not knowing anything about the service you are promoting with your signature.
We should avoid every type of extremism, especially in forums like this.