Should we limit members in one campaign?

[Galactus]

I think it depends on the pool of campaign, large pool can large many members. Social media campaign should be limited)

[Overpower]

Yes thats good idea, example in bounty campaign we can choose 100 high quality people to participate in any campaign.

[bigzone]

Actually it depends on every project that exists, namely the project. If members are not restricted and tend to be many, usually the distribution of tokens will be small. But if some members limit their number, the Token may increase from the unrestricted. The more who participate and become members of the Bounty campaign, the smaller the receipt of the Token. Vice versa.

[Dacosta]

If bounty participants are more, the project gets much exposure and the possibility that the project would be successful is high. Getting more coins in a project which later turns to be a shit coin is useless.

[Mr.X]

I think it is good for the members who joined in the campaign is under limit because  it can be a similarity of rewards especially those newly comers attended.

[shintosai]

It's always depend with funds allocations and with how the manager will take care of the said campaign, I agree limiting participants since a lots of incidents that spamming are been spreading around, with limiting bounty hunters it can help the project smoothly without having any issue with both rewards and how the campaign will work for the project.

[Galactus]

Limited campaign increases quality of bounty, we should think about when we call mass of spam

[wokee12]

No the restrict will not damage the project because the fine of publish wil be lots better, yes extra human beings are invested inside the assignment but no longer seriously or a touch. With restrained human beings they are able to represant the venture with their approach.

[JasmineRose]

Dear all,
Sorry for any inconvenience for this topic,
I’ve ever joined some bounty campaigns and get some tokens. Bellow are my thinking:
There are some projects attract so much participants, although that means the project is very interesting but it has limited bonus. Result, bonus that each participant receivers from the campaign very small. A lot of participants in one campaign has made so many spams on social networking….
So a question here: Should we limit members in one campaign?
(maybe depend on the bonus value of that campaign)
What are your thinking?
Please share…

It's bounty manager decision. We can't change it. We just follow and join.  More participant is good to make marketing widely

[tamango]

I prefer bounties with few tasks and a limited numbers of partecipants and that rewards bounty hunters for good content, for example:
max 20 tweets in whole campaign and   number of coins depends of original post and if post is liked/retweeted or not. In this way spammers will receive near 0 coins 

[Dprincebh]

It will have been super best to limit the number of participants in a bounty program. I ever did a bounty for about 3 month and end up getting token not up to a $50 which is too bd

[muneerashine]

If you have big bounty budget no need to limit the participants,because I've seen a lot of participants who stop promoting the project if they found a better project with high hype in the market.

[JSD10M]

Should we limit members in one campaign?

This is not a bounty hunter's call, that is for the bounty manager or the team to decide.
The goal of marketing managers is to market the ICO to as many people as possible while the goal of bounty hunters is to get more tokens as possible.

[cyrenemae]

for me there is no limit to joining the bounty campaign program that depends on the company we supply

[Dreamer02]

It really depends on the bounty manager, because as far as i know bounty managers will be the one setting the rules for that particular bounty, yes there are some bounties limit thier participants and thier are bounties only high ranks allowed to join, it really depends on the bounty manager.