Three phase of crypto payment distribution, adopt or abandon?

[Jaguar]

You know, I really like the idea of three phase distribution to avoid sudden and massive dump of particular altcoin. It is  vigilant strategy to be fair in two parties between investors and hunters. I'm not against it. But, recently I've noticed the repeated questions of hunters about the distribution over and over again in a thousand times. Highly appreciated the efforts of bounty managers and the admin who consistently response in a million times even though questions are annoying and irritable to answer.

Some hunters accused the manager as scammer.
Some hunters became emotional.
Some hunters get angry.
Some hunters became hopeless not to accept the payment.
Some hunters became impatient.
But some hunters choose to wait, work, willing, support and patient to receive the rewards.

Do you think three phase distribution will become the norm in the future or not?
What are the negative and positive sides of this method in cryptocurrency bounty campaign?

[masterrex]

For me Im not againts with that option, but it should be applicable on selected projects only. like those promising projects with a legit and commited team to distribute the payment. because we are all aware that some projects are not truth to their words like the DigitalBits team they are bunch of scammers that after 3 months of promotion and almost a year of waiting it was ending up by not paying of its promoters.   

[Jaguar]

For me Im not againts with that option, but it should be applicable on selected projects only.

Three phase distribution should be optional depends on legitimacy of the project 'coz hunters efforts could become nothing in case the project potential declining and the token value in the market drastically drop. Possible after hunters job within 2 or 3 months went to nothing and unforgivable thing, unfortunate.

[Senin]

First of all, the deadline for payment of new tokens to bounty hunters should be clearly stipulated from the outset and only changed in special cases. In general, I do not mind receiving payments to wallets for several months in several parties. However, there are often cases when early investors immediately dump the tokens purchased at a discount and significantly reduce its price. After the bounty hunters receive tokens after a while, the token price no longer rises. Why should we always be in worse conditions than investors? In my opinion, this is unfair.

[bubbalex]

As a bounty manager, in whose campaigns the three-phase payment method is used quite often I can express my opinion on this issue. I had 3 such campaigns, Ferrum Networks, Cartesi, DIA, all three projects are successful (it is not yet possible to say for sure, as the DIA distribution is ahead, but the fundraising is good). Besides, I had many other campaigns with another form of token payment and some of them were unsuccessful.

What are the advantages:

1. The team is worried about the price of tokens on the exchange, so they are going to develop their project in the future.
2. Potential investors and advisors will pay more attention to the project, because they invest their money and do not want the bounty hunters to get a bunch of tokens "for free".
3. Unfair bounty hunters will not be able to immediately drop the price after receiving their tokens. Despite the fight against fraudsters in any campaign there are always those who could not be detected and banned.
4. Bounty hunters will be able to sell their tokens on a higher price or even hold them, stake or use for mining.

What are the disadvantages:

1. Bounty hunters will need to wait longer to receive full payment.


In general, some of participants are constantly complaining about that, I can say only about my campaigns: Distribution terms are always announced from the beginning. IF you're uncomfy with them - do not join.

Some saying that project can scam members and do not pay them - I can only say that if project fails or ended up scam you will not get payment anyway, with one-time payment or three phase payment. This is not the only payment method, and most likely not the best, projects and campaigns have very different conditions. However, my main thesis is that a project and a bounty campaign are not bad because of payment methods, but for other reasons.


My personal advice to all hunters - always check project carefully and read every single word written in bounty thread, otherwise you will end up asking why you have no rewards.

[Debasco]

The three phase submission is preferred by bounty manager to prevent token price because of the believe that hunter will flood the market with the reward earn which will inturn affect the price of the project, so to say its good and its not good. but the look of things now bounty manager may adopt it because of token price.

[Andruha1993]

I think a three-phase token distribution is a great option. Since the price of the project's coin will not drop down so much and the project team will be happy and the bounty hunters.

[LogiC]

Probably referring to BubbleAlex way of distribution right? I think this is a good way to avoid dump but of course certain hunters will not like the idea. But its not hard to accept or understand. Come on, 3months is not that long if you are gonna think about it. Good news for those who joined his latest campaign dia as the hunters are all lucky to earn tokens. Anyway what more can you say, but for me its totally fine and acceptable.

[hair]

Every dump price in the market because they sells the tokens on a large scale.
I support that distribution into 3 phases
Bounty hunters can get a decent price on sale.

Maybe the downside is that bounty hunters will feel desperate because they have to wait a long time to get their tokens. This is normal.

[Hope4life]

Distribution within three phases is good option since the project team will have time to stabil their token price, it's also will give hunters a good amount of money. But the bounty manager should do escrow to make sure it'll pay.

[ryap12]

Giving 3 phases for distribution is also a great strategy. It avoids dumping of the project's cryptocurrency. You probably get dumped by your girlfriend first before the crypto gets dumped. Also, giving 3 phases for distribution will let the cryptocurrency breath for a while and may possibly attract investors to buy and hodl that crypto. I hate it when most of the bounty hunters automatically dumps the crypto once they get it.

[Paglamon]

We have many good managers in our forums. Because of the questions that are currently being asked, the campaigns are going to be much better. I've seen tokens listed on many exchanges. Bounty hunters are benefiting. So I think the projects carry a good reputation of the manager. Because if there is a good investor, the project is definitely successful. As in most projects, investors are much better. ICO price has increased a lot. For example, the DIA Data project, which ended a few days ago, has been a huge success. Even after selling huge amounts there is still a lot of demand in the market. Everyone is talking or will be as popular as anyone else. However, I was unable to participate in any of your campaigns. I think the DIA price will exceed 20. So it is better to buy.

[Jaguar]

As a bounty manager, in whose campaigns the three-phase payment method is used quite often I can express my opinion on this issue. I had 3 such campaigns, Ferrum Networks, Cartesi, DIA, all three projects are successful (it is not yet possible to say for sure, as the DIA distribution is ahead, but the fundraising is good). Besides, I had many other campaigns with another form of token payment and some of them were unsuccessful.

What are the advantages:

1. The team is worried about the price of tokens on the exchange, so they are going to develop their project in the future.
2. Potential investors and advisors will pay more attention to the project, because they invest their money and do not want the bounty hunters to get a bunch of tokens "for free".
3. Unfair bounty hunters will not be able to immediately drop the price after receiving their tokens. Despite the fight against fraudsters in any campaign there are always those who could not be detected and banned.
4. Bounty hunters will be able to sell their tokens on a higher price or even hold them, stake or use for mining.

What are the disadvantages:

1. Bounty hunters will need to wait longer to receive full payment.


In general, some of participants are constantly complaining about that, I can say only about my campaigns: Distribution terms are always announced from the beginning. IF you're uncomfy with them - do not join.

Some saying that project can scam members and do not pay them - I can only say that if project fails or ended up scam you will not get payment anyway, with one-time payment or three phase payment. This is not the only payment method, and most likely not the best, projects and campaigns have very different conditions. However, my main thesis is that a project and a bounty campaign are not bad because of payment methods, but for other reasons.


My personal advice to all hunters - always check project carefully and read every single word written in bounty thread, otherwise you will end up asking why you have no rewards.

Well said bounty manager, I'm really concern about all managers who adopt three phase distribution 'coz it is difficult and challenging to handle such distribution.
Challenge 1: Patient
Challenge 2: Consistency
Challenge 3: Reliability
Challenge 4: Compassion
Challenge 5: Passion
Challenge 6: To handle the unfortunates condition between the project and hunters.

It is not just hunters who need patient but both.
I hope there are more bounty managers who will run good bounty. I also hope that hunters have enough time to real the General rules of the campaign, and to have enough patient to receive the payment according to what was said in bounty thread.

[Senin]

You know, I really like the idea of three phase distribution to avoid sudden and massive dump of particular altcoin. It is  vigilant strategy to be fair in two parties between investors and hunters. I'm not against it. But, recently I've noticed the repeated questions of hunters about the distribution over and over again in a thousand times. Highly appreciated the efforts of bounty managers and the admin who consistently response in a million times even though questions are annoying and irritable to answer.

Some hunters accused the manager as scammer.
Some hunters became emotional.
Some hunters get angry.
Some hunters became hopeless not to accept the payment.
Some hunters became impatient.
But some hunters choose to wait, work, willing, support and patient to receive the rewards.

Do you think three phase distribution will become the norm in the future or not?
What are the negative and positive sides of this method in cryptocurrency bounty campaign?

In fact, there is a common practice in the world - after completing the stipulated work, you must immediately pay the stipulated amount. It's just that bounty hunters are used to dictating any additional conditions, whoever they want. If these conditions were in the preliminary agreements, then they can be applied, if not, then after the agreed work, the ICO team must immediately pay with their tokens.
Let them try to play with investors in the three payment phases, because they have more opportunities to influence the price of a new token when it appears on the exchange.

[Istiak]

I have no problem with these methods if they really keep their promise. We have seen cartesi have done this and they pay users timely. Good bounty managers can force the project team to distribute rewards timely. So as long as all of them are honest to keep their promise I think this is a good way to prevent dumping.