Signature campaigns & forum earning discussion thread.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

Yeah, I like the idea of having this new thread, which can enable members to have a general discussion about any paid campaign on the forum, unlike the first topic you created, which to me should just be a thread for any current and latest updates about signatures for running campaigns, ending campaigns, etc. 

For the time being, I think I feel satisfied with how the campaign on the forum is still running. As time goes on and if new campaigns continue to launch here to the extent that they pose a competition among similar brands, there will definitely be some adjustments to the campaign rules, and the campaign manager knows what best rules to add that can make the promoted projects more visible. For example, I can say that Coinomiz has the most number of campaign participants on this forum, and it's a good strategy for them to be very visible. 

[electronicash]

what about allowing us to use the ref program link? a referral contest maybe? the forum does reward referral as we have read it. Mixers can also do the same.

and article writing contest most probably about mixers. it will be a big promotion if one could publish it to big audience. there's got to be users out there wanted mix their ETH to make it anonymous but are not aware they could do this.

[pawel7777]

Yeah, I like the idea of having this new thread, which can enable members to have a general discussion about any paid campaign on the forum, unlike the first topic you created, which to me should just be a thread for any current and latest updates about signatures for running campaigns, ending campaigns, etc.

Thanks. I haven't started the first topic though. It was tranthidung.

what about allowing us to use the ref program link?

That's a good one. It's very rarely specified in campaigns terms and conditions, but from my experience, every service that offers referral programmes is happy with participants using referral links, as it offers an extra incentive, that makes people keep posting even after hitting the maximum paid posts number, or to keep the signature even after the campaign is ended or paused.
Sometimes all it takes is to ask if they're OK with it.

Funny enough, I was participating in campaigns that openly allowed and encouraged participants to use their referral links, but only a small percentage of them bothered to do it.

[SamReomo]

This is worst idea ever
Only result from this would be increase of spam and worthless junk posts.
There is not enough discussions to pay for that, and I would reduce number of posts from 30 to 20 or 25 any slightly increase payrate.

It's not the worst idea trust me, if you remember Mixero campaign on Bitcointalk, then you will understand that this idea was working back then and it was a good one. Though, the amount paid per post on that forum was way high than on this forum for the posts but none of the members were making spam posts, in fact they were putting their best efforts to make those extra posts.

I didn't said that it would be compulsory to make 40, 50, or 60 posts, I just said that maximum paid posts should be increased from current 30 to 40, 50 or possibly 60. The minimum posts still should be around 20 posts or whatever a user can post but the maximum paid posts should be increased.

In initial days when signatures shifted on this forum then many people were thinking that it would be hard to make those 30 posts here on weekly basis but now many members make more than 30 posts a week and I believe that those posts doesn't fall into the category of spamming.

If signature campaigns make the average weekly posts 30, you will find that most members will make 20 to 40 posts. If the same campaign increases it to 50, you will find that the average has shifted to 30 to 60.  the higher number of paid posts will force more to post, but it is difficult to do weekly 50 High quality posts, many of your posts will turn into a spam.
25 posts as a maximum is a good limit, and I don’t know why 30 is the average here.

Even if a manager makes the maximum weekly paid posts to 50 I believe a few members will manage to make that number of posts without spamming. I believe the maximum number of paid posts should get increased but the minimum should remain the same.

However, once the forum gets some good traffic and more exposure on search engines then most of the services could increase the rate of the posts and may reduce the number of max paid posts to 40.

[pawel7777]

It's not the worst idea trust me, if you remember Mixero campaign on Bitcointalk, then you will understand that this idea was working back then and it was a good one. Though, the amount paid per post on that forum was way high than on this forum for the posts but none of the members were making spam posts, in fact they were putting their best efforts to make those extra posts.

I remember back in the days, there were some campaigns on btctalk with no max limit of paid posts, they would pay for every single one as long as the manager considered it to be constructive.
You have a point it could work well when managers are only taking in trusted posters and are ready to boot out spammers, and when participants don't want to risk losing good earning opportunities by spamming with low-quality posts.

[examplens]

I didn't said that it would be compulsory to make 40, 50, or 60 posts, I just said that maximum paid posts should be increased from current 30 to 40, 50 or possibly 60. The minimum posts still should be around 20 posts or whatever a user can post but the maximum paid posts should be increased.

Paying for 50 or 60 posts is an introduction to spamfest. And such posts will certainly be of lower quality, so you will then receive a payment rate of $0.5 or even less, per post.
Even on BTT, there are not many people who write such a large number of posts and they are of good quality.

Limiting to a minimum of 20 posts is nothing more than forcing users to spam to get paid. Someone here does not want to go to the maximum, but writes as much as he thinks is necessary and as much as suits him.

[notblox1]

We can all agree that things can not be the same here as in bitcointalk forum.
I want to see more quality members here but for that you need to have higher payment and better terms, it is as simple as that.
And maybe current campaign services could share information what results they have since they joined altcoinstalks forum.

[milewilda]

We can all agree that things can not be the same here as in bitcointalk forum.
I want to see more quality members here but for that you need to have higher payment and better terms, it is as simple as that.
And maybe current campaign services could share information what results they have since they joined altcoinstalks forum.

For sure those amounts could neither be a

*Test up purpose
*Less pay for a non-popular forum

It would be always reflecting out and this is why projects wont really be putting up big into something which they do saw that this isnt
something as big with BTT. This is why its not really that shocking that campaign payments were less but actually its not really that a
bad start specially now that it is actually getting some traction or attention from BTT forum members gradually and make those
teleportation of their accounts.

[SamReomo]

You have a point it could work well when managers are only taking in trusted posters and are ready to boot out spammers

Yes, that's what I was trying to say, good posters would never ever make spam posts and even if they get paid for less posts but still they will keep up the quality of the posts. Some users who are good posters would manage to make even 40-50 posts easily by devoting more time on this forum. They don't really have to post spam in order to get paid for that.

Paying for 50 or 60 posts is an introduction to spamfest. And such posts will certainly be of lower quality, so you will then receive a payment rate of $0.5 or even less, per post.

It won't be introduction of spamfest if managers accept trusted posters. If someone has to spam then that user doesn't need to make 50-60 posts even 10 posts would be enough to create spam on a forum but the users who who understand the importance of quality posts will not spam even if they make 50, 60, or 80 posts a week.

[JoyMarsha]

I think probably the best thing these signature campaigns can do is to increase the number of paid posts from 30 to 50 or 60.

It's not about having an increased number of paid posts, is about how quality are the posts made. What campaign managers want are quality posts.

Asking for an increased number of posts from 30-60 per week is not a good idea if am to say, because it will attract spam in the forum. People will post for nothing's sake just to meet up for weekly post counts without being constructive in the posts they make. Remember, the majority of people teleported their account here and also in another forum promoting a signature paid campaign. Asking them to post 60 here, coupled with the post they made in another forum will be way too much for them to take up per week. 

[pawel7777]

Asking for an increased number of posts from 30-60 per week is not a good idea if am to say, because it will attract spam in the forum. People will post for nothing's sake just to meet up for weekly post counts without being constructive in the posts they make. Remember, the majority of people teleported their account here and also in another forum promoting a signature paid campaign. Asking them to post 60 here, coupled with the post they made in another forum will be way too much for them to take up per week.

SamReomo is not asking for participants to post 60 post a week. He suggested increasing the max paid post number, not the minimum required.
Any paid posting attracts spam and there's no magic number for how many posts should be paid. If managers are willing to take on board only high-quality posters and actively fight blatant spammers, then it shouldn't be a problem. As mentioned above, there already have been campaigns even without any max limits and it worked pretty well.
The better the earning opportunities - the more likely the participants will be cautious not to spam and not lose their spot.

Looking at the last week of Coinomize campaign, there were almost 20 people who didn't even hit the max paid 30 posts. We also had 5 people posting more than 60 posts despite only being paid for 30 (there's a $10 bonus for best posters though).

So again, it could work as long as managers are willing to weed out low-quality posters.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

How do you see the fact that three campaigns have already been paused? At the moment I don't see it as too catastrophic but if I see another one put on hold I'm going to start thinking that the sponsors are not getting a sufficiently profitable return on investment. If things stay as they are and we hook up with the bull market, I think new campaigns will come to the forum, but one more step in the other direction and it looks black.

[Doovla]

How do you see the fact that three campaigns have already been paused? At the moment I don't see it as too catastrophic but if I see another one put on hold I'm going to start thinking that the sponsors are not getting a sufficiently profitable return on investment. If things stay as they are and we hook up with the bull market, I think new campaigns will come to the forum, but one more step in the other direction and it looks black.

The best thing would be in meantime is to be more empty slots created for each project ,in that way everything get in faster movement for promotion development and so for people that are long waiting for slot for them to get open.

[examplens]

The best thing would be in meantime is to be more empty slots created for each project ,in that way everything get in faster movement for promotion development and so for people that are long waiting for slot for them to get open.

These are not bounty campaigns where you pay with worthless tokens but with real money. There is a big difference because, in campaigns with useless tokens, you can promise everything unlimited, while with real money it is coordinated with the budget.

Mixers that are currently the most active here with signature campaigns are not projects, but independent and fully functional businesses. They do not need mass, but the best possible promotion within the budget.

Don't be frustrated, stay active on the forum and give some quality, in time a free slot will be open.

[paid2]

The best thing would be in meantime is to be more empty slots created for each project ,in that way everything get in faster movement for promotion development and so for people that are long waiting for slot for them to get open.

Campaigns are a privilege, not a right, and someone need to pay the bill at the end. So I think the managers manage the number of slots according to the budget and the volume of posts on the forum.

It's easier for a big casino like Stake to offer a campaign (on Bitcointalk I mean) with lots of slots, than it is for a new small business. It is possible that the latter would probably prefer fewer people to wear their signature but for a longer period of time at equal budget for example, etc..etc..