Altcoins Talks - Cryptocurrency Forum
Archive => Sorting Box => Topic started by: bosshyip on July 08, 2018, 07:19:24 AM
-
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…
-
Hi bosshyip,
I think its a good idea to limit members in a campaign, you just said that, we got less because there is to many people in.
-
I think it should be left up to the discretion of whoever is running the campaign, or whoever is paying for it really. If they wants tons of people promoting, and people are willing to do it and share a smaller stack, let them. This is basic supply and demand imo, good projects get lots of people regardless.
-
Its an interesting question.. I think it shouldn't be limited but can see the benefits of it being limited. I'll have to think on this subject over a couple of days and see if I can brainstorm some pluses or minuses to this and will post more if I can think of anything... really like the proposed question though.
-
I agree that many members of the company do not always give good results. Sometimes it's better to limit the participants not by quantity, but by the quality of Facebook accounts and Twitter with a lot of friends and followers
-
it depends on the manager and devs... i would agree to establish a limit but also understand if they want as many people as possible promoting their project... concerning bounty hunters they just have to do the math and check if it is worth it or not, instead of blindly joining every bounty in sight
-
it depends on the manager and devs... i would agree to establish a limit but also understand if they want as many people as possible promoting their project... concerning bounty hunters they just have to do the math and check if it is worth it or not, instead of blindly joining every bounty in sight
I agree on you mate, no need to join if it's already crowded. You need to respect those who join earlier and find other bounty that will give you more reward. Those developers wants many people to promote their projects and they have their rules.
-
I saw a bounty campaign where the pool of reward varied depending on the number of participants.
-
That will be a good idea because I have participated in some campaigns with limited number of the people and the returns turn out to be very huge as compared to those with large numbers. Limiting the number of participants also reduces spam.
-
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…
Limiting the number of participants is good for bounty hunters, not managers or team. Thus, they don't really need it. But, some kind of bounties, as signature, translation and content creation are limited by the market itself, and usually these sections contain high budget allocations, making contributing to these sections very rewarding and promising.
Although there are campaigns that limit its member quantity for some level.
-
Hi,
i just want to say something more, check this bounty https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=33209.0,
they have limited members in their campaign signature so the rait/paid in tokens is more higger.
-
Hi,
i just want to say something more, check this bounty https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=33209.0,
they have limited members in their campaign signature so the rait/paid in tokens is more higger.
it's good when a project is limiting it's members, the ones who promote the project will do it more willingly because they know they will be paid much more than if members count was not limited
-
That is fair enough to distribute the tokens to every participants. Big enough than no limit members.
-
Hi,
i just want to say something more, check this bounty https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=33209.0,
they have limited members in their campaign signature so the rait/paid in tokens is more higger.
Thanks for highlighting my bounty campaign. And yes, you are right, i am limiting the number of participants so that all the signature participants are able to get good rewards.
-
Hi,
i just want to say something more, check this bounty https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=33209.0,
they have limited members in their campaign signature so the rait/paid in tokens is more higger.
Thanks for highlighting my bounty campaign. And yes, you are right, i am limiting the number of participants so that all the signature participants are able to get good rewards.
Hi! Are you always doing that, I mean limiting number of participants? It is a great way doing bounty business.
-
the reason of limiting participants of campaign to able to get higher reward,i disagree of that opinions.what's happen to some member who does not able to participate the campaign the are also like us need to earn money,we are one family of this forum we should have sympathy to one another not only money thinking but concern also the needs of some members
-
this is the concern of the bounty managers and I think if there are many participants for the bounty that will help the project so it is not easy for them to do such rules.
-
That is very unlikely to happen since the more participants on a bounty campaigns the more chance for an ICO project to get an investor to invest on ther project.
-
In my personal opinion, it is better to limit the participant in the bounty campaign. Because, more participants will influence the rewards, moreover the low-rank participant.
-
the reason of limiting participants of campaign to able to get higher reward,i disagree of that opinions.what's happen to some member who does not able to participate the campaign the are also like us need to earn money,we are one family of this forum we should have sympathy to one another not only money thinking but concern also the needs of some members
Yes, you're right. From your post I got an idea that not only number of members is to be limited, but also number of campaigns per member, that is there is need for algorithm or moderators that will ensure that a member of forum no matter what rank is wont join too much campaigns leaving others without chance to join one.
-
It is very important to limit the number of participants in a campaign so that the bounty rewards allocation to each participants is big.
-
It is always good to have limitation on member in one campaign. Limited mean the stake that we get will be higher but in other way is that we must be active in the campaign.
-
In my opinion, it is a good idea if limiting the participants of the bounty. We know that the allocation for the bounty is limited. It is better and also proportional to deliver for some participants. The limitation of the participants can make the bounty hunters spirit in doing their task.
-
Bounty campaigns should limit the participants for the reasons of dividing their income from the project must be righteous for everyones share..
-
It is very important to limit the number of participants in a campaign so that the bounty rewards allocation to each participants is big.
i agree with you maybe more members can com than 15-20 peoples, like 50 max but yes the rewards is biger for each participants. Anyway the bounty manager decide.
-
Sure, if there are too many members the reward will be very poor so personally I joined only in bounties that have a maximum of partecipants or with few ones.
-
It would be an advantage to the project if more people would join the project because they can reach more people but when it comes to the participants, it would be better if the participants are limited because you know the estimated amount you can receive. If there are thousands of participants in an unlimited campaign, there would be lesser amount and you may end up receiving only a dollar for months of promoting you have done. Some campaigns choose the people that promote their project and they only want those who has quality post.
-
I think yes, to give participant higher rewards after the campaign.
-
It would be an advantage to the project if more people would join the project because they can reach more people but when it comes to the participants, it would be better if the participants are limited because you know the estimated amount you can receive. If there are thousands of participants in an unlimited campaign, there would be lesser amount and you may end up receiving only a dollar for months of promoting you have done. Some campaigns choose the people that promote their project and they only want those who has quality post.
The quality post is important, with a lot of members in a campaign the quality is negligate by the bounty manager so yeah im agree with you.
-
The main aim of the bounty program is to reach out to more people and attract investors so limiting participants means you will be reducing your target market
-
In my opinion, the restrictions will harm the project. The more people will be involved in the project, the more people can learn about it, believe and take part. maybe I'm wrong.
-
In my opinion, the restrictions will harm the project. The more people will be involved in the project, the more people can learn about it, believe and take part. maybe I'm wrong.
No the restriction will not harm the project because the quality of post wil be a lot better, yes more people are invested in the project but not seriously or a little. With restricted people they can represant the project with their method.
-
If we limit the number, it will only be to the advantage of the bounty hunters but it will be a disadvantage to the project since it cant reach out to more people
-
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…
Definetly thats should bounty manager doing in order to distribute the bounty fairly and equaly according to its ranks,because there are times thats because of so many participant the value of those amount thats recieved by each member will become small and we can recieved only a small portion of bounty token,while in other hand if we limits those participants in bounty campaign we become greedy to our own neccesity,so thats why the decision about this coming from the bounty manager either he limits the participation or not.
-
Everything is good and bad. But I agree if it is not limited because then there may be a good project so many people can be helped
-
I think limiting members in one campaign will go a lonv way to improve the tokens obtained by a specific member in the campaign. It will also not affect the members so much if the bounty is prolonged.
-
Hi,
i just want to say something more, check this bounty https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=33209.0,
they have limited members in their campaign signature so the rait/paid in tokens is more higger.
Thanks for highlighting my bounty campaign. And yes, you are right, i am limiting the number of participants so that all the signature participants are able to get good rewards.
Limiting the participants is fair enough to received fair reward at the end from lower rank to higher rank the distribution seems equal. Nice way of showing the understanding of bounty manager. Thanks
-
not necessarily, because I think for members of the campaign do not need to be limited so that more members then the work will be more light.
-
Hello all! Well it's will be my first post on AltcoinsTalks.
About bountys. I think Social Media bounty campaigns MUST BE limited. Specially Facebook and Twitter. So many people want to join,so mayn people are joining, but staying inactive trough all campaig.If you check spreadsheets later, soma of these people are inactive...
But ok lets talk about limits. Limits must be , how i said speciall on FB and Twitter. Bounters getting just ridiculuos amounts of tokens for these campaigs. It's like 3-5$ for 2 months work.
So my opinion FB and Twitter bounty campaigns must be limited ! And if some guy registered , but is inactive after first or second week, he must be deleted,and should'nt get any reward for this.
-
This is a concern of bounty manager and already practice by some of them due to the continues growth of bounty participants.
-
Due to unstoppable bounty hunters to join the campaign that makes the members tremendously. actually it is not the concern of bounty hunters to limit the participants but it is the responsibility of the manager or maybe it is depends on the planning system.
-
it depends on the manager and devs... i would agree to establish a limit but also understand if they want as many people as possible promoting their project... concerning bounty hunters they just have to do the math and check if it is worth it or not, instead of blindly joining every bounty in sight
Well, as a bounty hunters or a participant on a specific campaign project, limited participants means big stakes or reward to earned. As you said mate, hired bounty managers didnt put limited slots because the devs want it and yeah your right, they want too many participants to promote their project.
-
I like to join the bounty campaign limited the participants or fixed amount reward, if not you will get few amounts of token after the campaign finished due to the so many participants or multi-account.
-
Due to unstoppable bounty hunters to join the campaign that makes the members tremendously. actually it is not the concern of bounty hunters to limit the participants but it is the responsibility of the manager or maybe it is depends on the planning system.
I think it depend on the planning system in correlation with the bounty manager. The quality of posts must be better than a campaign where there's no limited members. And it's easier for the bounty manager to check and valid all the posts.
-
This is bounty managers decision but for me, yes i agree to give limit on particular campaign, but we are bounty hunters we're here because for some practical reasons to earn, we must share the blessings to others because we have same purpose for being here in this crypto world. On selfish thought limited is the best option but we have to consider others also looking the opportunity to join and earn.
-
This is bounty managers decision but for me, yes i agree to give limit on particular campaign, but we are bounty hunters we're here because for some practical reasons to earn, we must share the blessings to others because we have same purpose for being here in this crypto world. On selfish thought limited is the best option but we have to consider others also looking the opportunity to join and earn.
They can join also if it's a newbie, you just need to join at the right time not to late and if the Jr members et seignor members are full you can do more post to become a hero members and generaly you have a lot of time to join bounty.
-
Some campaigns are limiting their participants but only few campaigns are doing this but most campaign did not limit the participants because they need more participants to advertise and wear their signature to be known.
-
I think we have to invent a restriction for the participants of the bounty of companies with the same IP address. Often, one bounty participant creates 10 accounts and participates in one company for 10 people. This is wrong and it is necessary as it is limited, it may be better to come up with the passage of KYC as an ICO and then there will be less scams
-
It should be limited as it is considered as cheating.
-
OK. I think that depends on the requirements and regulations made by the ICO Project, bro. I think if there are restrictions on participants, the bounty campaign might be caused by the ICO's internal regulations, bro. Although there are several projects that do not limit the number of Bounty Participants but still later the acquisition of the Token will be divided equally. It's likely in my opinion like that.
-
I think this is really a good thing that the admin will review most especially for campaigns that there are lot's of participant because there are time that the bounty hunters receive only a little rewards due to so many participants.
-
Yes I think there should be a number that will limit the participants. Otherwise the bounty will divide too much.
-
You clearly stated that ... although that means the project is very interesting. Everyone who works is because they know its a good project and they'll receive their rewards. The project has made an allocation of token out of the total supply, and they need people to spread their news around. Reducing number of participants in bounty is a decision to be taken by the project management. Taking a certain number of participants has only been on Signature campaigns where one is paid directly in bitcoins, have not seen any on bounties.
-
I disagree with you bro. Because the purpose of the campaign is to make their project be known to the willing investors and users in order for them to make a profit. If they limit the participants of their bounty then they will have a lesser chance of advertising their campaign. That's what I thought.
-
You need to calculate how much your stakes are worth, at least after a week. You are right. Sometimes I see thousands of participants at Twitter and Facebook bounty campaigns. I have never participated such bounties. I think they are just a waste of time. But to limit number of participants will not be fair too.
-
If I think it is true that members of the Bounty campaign in a project must be limited according to the capacity and ability of the project parties to provide rewards to campaign members. If there are too many members of the Bounty campaign, there will be fewer rewards given by the bounty manager to the campaign members, because the tokens they give are divided equally from all members of the existing Bounty campaign.
-
Nice topic although few months ago.
Nowaday, honestly bounty activity give me small reward.
Cause the major factor is a lot of participant that joined that bounty.
We can't blame developer team and bounty manager cause if many partisipant it will make spread the project nicely.
But try to limit member of bounty campaign I think good work for bounty hunter and make better prosperity.
But in my heart deeply, I want agree if limit members. Cause why? I think bounty hunter like another profession. And it spend time, mind, etc. The developer or bounty should be honor that.
-
I think limiting participants is good for the bounty hunters, but not good for the spreading of the token, thats why projects didnt limit participants :(
-
Depends of the buget of bounty if its low i think its a good ideea to limit the participations nowbody want to work at least a month and get low reward ,if the buget is high no ,everybody will get a good reward.
-
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…
for me it is necessary to limit the participation of companies to lesser wages per member to join a company.
-
I think it depends on the pool of campaign, large pool can large many members. Social media campaign should be limited)
-
Yes thats good idea, example in bounty campaign we can choose 100 high quality people to participate in any campaign.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Limited campaign increases quality of bounty, we should think about when we call mass of spam
-
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.
-
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
-
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 8)
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
for me there is no limit to joining the bounty campaign program that depends on the company we supply
-
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.
-
There are a very few projects did that to guarantee bounty hunters' benefit. Most of the bounty managers don't care much about this. They only care about organize as many bounties as possible by showing the number of bounty hunters that take part in their bounties to project owners.
-
I think members should be restricted especially in signature and content campaigns, too many people in article campaigns tend to bring problems because scammers start copying the work of the first set of people to submit.
-
If possible, each bounty is given a limit on the number of participants. So that the results obtained for bounty hunters can be many. Because if the participants are large or unlimited, the results obtained are also small. Although for the ICO developer, they will be happy with the large number of participants, so that those who promote the ICO project are more numerous.
-
I am dealing with bounty for 6 months. participation in quality projects is getting too much and the amount is not worth $ 1 most of the time. social media bounty unfortunately does not have any return on time. If you can write an article because it gives.
-
Bounty hunters would definitely want to limit the number of participants so they can have more rewards. Founders on the other hand wants more exposure and the more the number of participants, the wider the reach.
It's a 50/50 for me, I want to have better rewards but I also want the project to have a higher chance of success in raising the funds from token sale.
-
Too many people in campaign articles tend to bring trouble because scammers start copying the work of the first group of people to submit. I think members must be limited especially in signature campaigns and content,
-
And besides articles, limiting the number of participants in bounty campaign largely depend on the project team decesion, unfortunately, every projects need certain high numbers of participants to information about project very wide.
-
On one hand it could be a good thing reason being that, the early birds will benefit and not have to share with latecomers. This method will profit bounty hunters greatly.
On the other hand, it will not profit the project much if participants are limited because the more the participants, the more the exposure and I believe most project look more at the exposure of their projects than the benefit of the hunter.
-
think its a good idea to limit members in a campaign, you just said that, we got less because there is to many people in.
-
Sometimes it's better to limit the participants not by quantity, but by the quality of Facebook accounts and Twitter with a lot of friends and followers
-
It is better to limit the number of participants so that they receive a decent reward for the work done.
-
I think members must be limited especially in campaigns and signature content. Too many people in campaign articles tend to bring trouble because scammers start copying works from the first group of people to send.
-
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…
That is a good idea to maximize the bounty rewards, we should always give a limit on the participants on a particular campaign.
-
I think we should limit to 1,000 people so that we can have a quality community, and the less people mean the higher reward, than they will focus on their work and trying to complete it
-
I think we should limit to 1,000 people so that we can have a quality community, and the less people mean the higher reward, than they will focus on their work and trying to complete it
There are campaigns that does this strategy. You don't find them often since there's only a few of them unfortunately.
-
Yes it is good to make limitation in bounty program. By this spam in social platform and the platform that run a bounty can be less. And participate can be limited by bounty budget. Also bounty hunters will get a good amount of reward if there have any limitation for participate.
-
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…
I thinking you are just right,Lots bounty participant make spam on social page .I think its all depend on the bounty team of this project .They have a plan how they go through and become succeeded . However it will be better to limit the members ,Everything depend on the team on this regards.
-
Yes it is good to make limitation in bounty program. By this spam in social platform and the platform that run a bounty can be less. And participate can be limited by bounty budget. Also bounty hunters will get a good amount of reward if there have any limitation for participate.
Yes definitely .If its become limited the payment of bounty hunters will be increased .They should work with more quality and without spamming as well.
-
I think everything depends on the gift team of this project. They have a plan for how they pass and become successful. But it would be better to limit the members. Everything depends on the team in this matter.
-
participating in a bounty can be limited by the bounty budget. Prize hunters will also get a good number of prizes if there are limits to participating. good for making restrictions in the gift program. With this spam on social platforms and platforms that run the gift can be lacking.
-
Whether or not to limit participants in ICO bounty campaigns is primarily up to the ICO project team. In general, it is in their interests that their project is advertised by as many more bounty campaigners. They limit the number of such participants when they are paid for a certain period of time, usually a week, directly in their tokens, and not in shares.
-
I think limiting the number of participants is very good to reduce spammers who register bounties with multiple accounts. So that the rewards are also obtained a lot more than unlimited participants
-
I think limiting the number of participants is very good to reduce spammers who register bounties with multiple accounts. So that the rewards are also obtained a lot more than unlimited participants
Most bounty hunters are of the opinion that it would be nice to limit the number of people joining a certain ICO generosity campaign, and above all the signature campaign, arguing that earnings in this case will be higher. However, the decision to limit the number of participants in the signature campaign will have almost no effect on reducing the number of people who use multiple accounts.
-
However, the decision to limit the number of participants in the signature campaign will have almost no effect on reducing the number of people who use multiple accounts.
Using a duplicate account on this forum will get marked "duplicate" on the profile, if someone try to use it will automatically be banned. Being an honest person is better than cheating to join the bounty.
-
I agree with your proposal. Members of the one campaign should be limited. Now a days lots of members join in one campaign but as a result there is no one get expected amount of coin for this reason scammer are trying to use duplicate account. So I think it project manager should think about this issue.
-
I think all bounty campaigns participants should limit because there a lot of participants but all participants don't follow bounties rules and regulations. At the end of any campaign participants hugely but we get a little bit amounts of payment. So i think BD and bubblex should limit participants.
-
I think limit participants in the bounties projects is a good decision. Because In a bounty campaign, lastly we get a little bit of amounts due to the huge participants. Examples of bounty detective and bubblex campaign, participants hugely but we get a tiny amounts.
-
I think limit participants in the bounties projects is a good decision. Because In a bounty campaign, lastly we get a little bit of amounts due to the huge participants. Examples of bounty detective and bubblex campaign, participants hugely but we get a tiny amounts.
Same here, I do think that limiting the participants is benefit to both the bounty hunters, and the bounty owner. With limited numbers of participants, bounty manager can assure the quality of the participants. He can easily identify the spammers, and low quality participants and kick them out of the campaign. The project will have a good impressions since bounty hunters are doing a quality job thus a possible more investors getting interested in participating in that project. In return, bounty participants will be well rewarded in their quality service thus will have the habit of doing their best to maintain those good rewards. Limiting participants is a win win thing for both bounty hunters, bounty managers and bounty campaign owner.
-
Campaigns with a caped number of participants is best. It guarantees quality participation and give the manager ease of monitoring
-
I think limit participants should not be possible because more the participants more the advertisements. But some disadvantages also... More participants less amount of payments hence a project still will be dead due to low amounts of exchange tokens.
-
With limited numbers of participants, bounty manager can assure the quality of the participants. He can easily identify the spammers, and low quality participants and kick them out of the campaign. The project will have a good impressions since bounty hunters are doing a quality job thus a possible more investors getting interested in participating in that project.
Yeah. This is also effective for selecting participants who have high loyalty and honesty in working on the bounty task. I think we want all of us to get profit.
-
Do you want centralisation or decentralisation? Limiting the number of participants means centralisation. The idea of decentralisation in this matter means that you let the market self-regulate the amount of participants. The more participants a bounty attracts the less incentive there will be for new ones to participate. I personally have a neutral stance in this by the way. Different projects set different rules. Some projects dissapoint me and some positively surprise me.
-
Every campaign we get maximum tokens which not require minimum gas fees and withdraw fees. So limited participants obviously need.
-
I think only social media campaigns participants should limit.
-
I think only social media campaigns participants should limit.
It sounds good. it will give lots of rewards for champaign social media.
-
Its an interesting question.. I think it shouldn't be limited but can see the benefits of it being limited. I'll have to think on this subject over a couple of days and see if I can brainstorm some pluses or minuses to this and will post more if I can think of anything... really like the proposed question though.
-
I request every bounty manager, they should limit the participants because we don't get nothing from bounty campaign.
-
I request every bounty manager, they should limit the participants because we don't get nothing from bounty campaign.
The bounty campaign manager does not have the authority to decide whether to limit the number of participants in signature and other campaigns. Such a decision can only be made by the ICO project team, and they are interested in the fact that the largest number of participants advertise their project.
-
It should limit to join within a week after bounty campaign launched. Or a, certain number of participants join the campaign.
-
Absolutely, limitation of participants in any campaign not only attract bounty hunters but also there is chance get a decent amount as reward. But, nowadays bounty came to end as exit scam so bounty manger didn't care this at all. But, this things must be changed.
-
I think so in recent bounty campaigns there are so many participants join in bounty campaign especially Facebook Twitter. Here if the manager make shortlist then it will better and participants get some rewards and also be care full in his/her work.
-
I think so in recent bounty campaigns there are so many participants join in bounty campaign especially Facebook Twitter.
very profitable is a twitter campaign rather than a facebook campaign. If we don't have many followers on twitter we will get few stakes. What should really be considered is the Facebook campaign because on average many people have 5000 friends
-
I think it is a good idea to limit the number of participants in a bounty. Because it is a good bounty, it is certain that the participants will be very many. And this makes the distribution of prizes we get very little because they are divided equally according to rank.
-
It's good disition for social media Facebook linkedin Twitter etc bounty campaign . Limiting perticipets are goods for bounty hunter . So that all the perticipets get good rewards.
-
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…
Yes, of course I agree with you. Maybe you have a certain limit.
-
Obviously we should limit bounty campaign participants because we get a little bit amount of assets after finishing campaign.
-
A place should be reserved for everyone. Twitter, Facebook, all social media, it is vital to limit participation in all these campaigns.
-
A place should be reserved for everyone. Twitter, Facebook, all social media, it is vital to limit participation in all these campaigns.
I think it is very crucial decision because everyone wants to earn from bounty campaigns but I think only first week Participant can choose for next week.
-
Actually others are already doing it to make sure their participants will get a satisfying payment. But still every bounty hunter have their own rules to follow so this is not in our decision.
-
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…
I think it should be limited. Otherwise participant will not get any profit by doing bounty campaign.
-
I think it should be limited. Otherwise participant will not get any profit by doing bounty campaign.
With a small allocation of rewards, limited participants are very profitable, especially social media bounties
-
We have no control over this matter since we are just bounty hunters but still this is good enough as long as you will receive the payment of your work compare to participating in a a scam project which is just eaten your time and effort and leave you with disappointment.
-
Some bounty managers have done it, they decided to limit the number of participants to make the payment in a good amount. They just choose the best participants to join and eliminate the remaining applicants. I've experienced it many times, for the example the signature campaign of Ludena and Free Ton. Well, this way makes the participants got a better payment but only a few people can join it.
-
This is a very interesting question but I think that limiting the number of participants in a particular campaign depends because there are some campaigns whose return varies based on the number of members participating.
-
I think if the budget limited or less then definitely limit is must to do. Other wise the the projects work will not be successful by the hunters. They will not serious.
-
actually it depends on your budget , if you are planing to put lot of money on that compaign making it limit wont help your project , but if you are focusing on the quality and not the quantity you should limit the number of the participating.
-
In depends on the particular campaign. There are some campaign that needs more participants. And there are some campaign that they limit the participants, so it depends on the specific campaign. Well infact the author or organizer of the campaign itself already know what will happen to the campaign.
-
This is really Very good thinking and Good Question. We know that on this time have mane bounty hunter and Spammer on the market. Also on this time 80% project is Scam and Failed. And Some projet is Successful but their Pool is Very low and for this reason we all get a very Low amount payment from our Hardworking.
-
I dont think that there should a limit of members in one campaign, because projects goal is to get maximum response from bounty campaign.
I under why hunters want to have a limit, to earn more. But to increase their earnins, they can participate in more than 1 campaign. While projects budget is not unlimited and they cant run lots of campaigns simulteniously and spend a lot.
-
I think it should be limited. Otherwise participant will not get any profit by doing bounty campaign.
With a small allocation of rewards, limited participants are very profitable, especially social media bounties
Yes sir after completing any projects,we don't get any amounts which gives us big amounts of money. So participants should limit in any campaign.
-
It is not uncommon to have more people in a campaign. It can work as it pleases in today's competitive market. Everyone has a priority to do this. This is your misconception.
-
Limiting member is very important in bounty so that to limit people that are going to participate!!! When there are too much people in a campaign we endup being paid little amount even after working for months.
-
No doubt some users making a good amount of tokens to spam multi-account, but if the bounty manager will check carefully and proof of authentication will provide for every bounty, then there is less chance to join for a spammer; this is a good idea for participants limit then will be handsome tokens for participants instead of a little number of tokens.
-
It should be limited but minimum number of participants should be minimum 500. In some Bounties it is limited to 50 or 100 , which is not fair.Everyone should have a chance to join.
-
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…
I think there should be no limit, but should score on your interaction with the campaign who is more interactive, I see the campaign that is known to many people, the value will also increase and the committee. get more when the coins are returned
-
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…
I think there should be no limit, but should score on your interaction with the campaign who is more interactive, I see the campaign that is known to many people, the value will also increase and the committee. get more when the coins are returned
In my opinion, participants should be limited because when there are too many people, the value of the coins will be divided among those who increased the bounty, making the participants no longer when they are paid the desired amount.
-
It should be limited but minimum number of participants should be minimum 500. In some Bounties it is limited to 50 or 100 , which is not fair.Everyone should have a chance to join.
I agree with the committee but the project is limited to attendees which makes me dislike because Minh klhong6 has the opportunity to do the project together with me but I believe the following projects will be unlimited because there are many people involved. then a lot of people know to invest as well as to advertise their project
-
That will be a smart thought since I have taken an interest in certain missions with set number of individuals and the profits end up being gigantic when contrasted with those with huge numbers. Restricting the quantity of members additionally lessens spam.
-
I think is good to limit members in one campaign. As u said earlier that the bonus are small because of plenty participants. Those member who are posting in relevant post and are not always active should be removed.
-
I think if the participants are not much then at least the bounty Hunters can earn well to some extent depending on the project.
-
There are some project that defines the limit of participants in their campaign, some even intentionally screen out with ranks, like "you must be at least a senior member to participate", some will intentionally give a high task to meet up with such as 20 post with 150 words and must be spread across 4 days, and many more.This is to make the token more valuable.
If there are many good projects people will have options than rushing of the very few ones always available.