Bitcoin Forum

A signature campaign is a type of marketing campaign where in the users are going to wear the projects name to their profile and advertising it through posting high quality contents as well as participating to discussions in order to expose the projects name.

I admit this kind of work/job here in the forum are the most known campaign in the forum. The growth of the users and bounty hunters here in the forum grows so fast as well as the upcoming projects in the crypto industry.

But this past month I've noticed a reputable manager that gets a red tag because he/she promote a project that scams investors. My concern here is that as a bounty hunter and as a promoter/signature participants we and everyone should be responsible enough, not just because they give us reward it means we should participate in them as a bounty hunter. I for one do have some criterias whether I joined or support a project or not, here are some of it:

• Reading the whitepaper - As a participants we should know what kind of project we're supporting or promoting. Because some people I know just wear the signature of the project without knowing what he/she is promoting all about.
• How the projects work - We should also know how the project will work, we should also need to have knowledge about different kinds of scam in order to spot whether the projects we're promoting is scam or not.
• The background of the team - Well this is optional but of course i want to make sure that the project is legit as well as its team members.

My point is let's help each other to stop scam by not supporting them and we can do that by knowing the projects we're going to support, well it's not just for the investors that can benefit if we're going to do this but the forum too. Well this is all my insights i want to share my main point here is we should be responsible enough on what projects we're going to support.

Excellent analysis. The point is that now all the campaigns last too long, and until the end you do not know how much they will pay you (and above all IF will pay you).
Also now it is practically impossible to climb in rank, so I do not know if it is still worth wasting time.

I a gree with you.
Experienced managers are sometimes also fooled by ico ico that is not true.
I have also experienced it several times.
read the key to know and besides I also often use Icobench or Icoholder as a benchmark in the signature.

To join in signature campaign is not only wear the project but also know is it. Sometimes most of us are eager to earn money without knowing how's the project and what is all about. Thanks to you, you have so many participants to understand.

Yes, I appreciate the idea you give to all crypto users in this forum, this is great for reducing the cheat action on behalf of crypto, recently making people feel aggrieved by the banning of crypto ads on other social networks found to fool people that just lying on crypto can make their trust lost to bitcoin, it should be in a fight but it's back quite difficult to analyze any projects that may be deceiving or not in every campaign, and people do not want to know the project issues they have and all they know is participate in the campaign and request a pre-approved payment, and I also do not want to know in other matters that are important to the already fulfilled campaign approval, yes nothing is wrong.

Yes you are right, everyone hopes that scams in ICO will end. However you will never know where to stop because we will never know  if the ICO is scam or not.

These are the factors needed to be considered before joining this campaign. Using signature codes on your posts give the project the marketing tool to expand their market to the wide audience here in bitcointalk. Thus, you are giving them the control of your eligibility to market legit projects.

You have a good point. I agree that not all the blame must be shouldered by the campaign manager alone because it is also the bounty participant's responsibility to check how legitimate the ICO he or she is about to join. Campaign managers, no matter how veteran, are human being and can be fooled as well. They should be accountable, yes, but the participants should also consider themselves accountable of such actions.

Well, I agree with theaythor, but I'm also sure that reputable bounty admins do check any team'sbackground before they start working with them. But still they cannot revealscammers every time. So we never know for sure.

You correctly say everything. But even this often is not enough. There are very good projects that are not honest with their bounty hunters. I will not call them, because they still promise to pay sometime. However, more than 3 months, 6 months have passed. Here, rather, the conversation should go about decency. But this is the Internet and you do not see people in person. Therefore the chance to see manipulation is zero.

Agree with author, when I started here, i looked at signatures of hero members due to choose bounty. If hero/legendary wears signature, a lot of junior can repeat after him, so wearing signature should be with preliminary analysis of project.

One should know what he/she is promoting to the community. It's a must have quality for an iconic user. But the fact is, everyone is not an expert in choosing a good project or avoiding scams. So, managers should be aware before starting any projects bounty here, I think it's a must-have quality for them.

We can not know which projects are scam, we can only know when at the end of ICO. To participate in the signature campaign I also do as you do, but it does not guarantee, we only hope that the project we support can be successful in ICO.

Completely agree with this. If you are going to support a team at least try to find their information and know whether they are capable of what their plans are or at least know who they are. Most scammers don't publish themselves nor show their faces on videos, if all the team members are only showing linked links and photos, these aren't enough to say they are legit. We all know anyone can create profiles but videos with themselves in it speaking about the project makes it legit.

Thank you for sharing and also i agree with you. I remember my first signature was scam,i so dissapointed to my self becaused i didnt reasearch about the project and the team behind of it, so the next i learn a lot before i joined signature i need to learn and search first. i do not want to be disappointed again because i'm not getting paid yet, i hope next time im luck,

I like youe points and analysis. I always read the whitepaper and look at the background of the team. Moreover it is important for me whether the project has a ready made product and not just airy promises. Usually projects that began their work long  before ICO is more likely not to be a scam

All good points. I agree with the fact that we cannot entirely blame a campaign manager if a project turned out to be a scam because some ICO's are actually investing to have a well-written whitepaper just so they can entice the community and make their project looks legit.

I, on the other hand, check their websites, first hand. Because their website, for me, is the entire compilation of what their project has already gone through so far. Their website must have their whitepaper, their team members, the road map (this is very important since this will give us a vision of what they have already accomplished and what they aims to accomplish in the near future.) Also, all about the details about their ICO and token sale should be included, well written, links are all working and such. A good ICO enters in a complete, well-made and a well prepared website and all its aspects and parts.

Very agreed, this is not Bounty manager fault. Everything from project and their team. Bounty manager only management the bounty campaign and have no right to distribute token to all participants. Many good project rewarded much and another also scam. Have good trip

this is a very brilliant idea from the topic maker, I strongly agree, and this is the material of our analysis in promoting bounty projects that we follow through the signature campaign, I often experience projects that give bad news that failed the project, I hope that our future is smarter in analyze the bounty that we follow.

Yes i attest to this. Many icos are coming out and its really hard to choose between them. Some icos are legit but if they don't reach the soft cap or the hard cap, they just give up and don't continue the project and the bounty hunters just worked for nothing. Sometimes its not just based on the project that they gain populariity to investors. It pays a lot if the ico has a good marketing staff that promotes the ico so investors would come and put in their money for the project.

You can add working product or MVP ,because it is the first thing that these investors are asking for ,ICO product because it is the important thing that investors need to have,so that they wont be hesitating to invest to such campaigns.Without a good working product,or atleast a prototype it will be going to be more hard for the campaign to achieve success.

I fully agree with the author of this topic! I very carefully and for a long time choose a company in which to participate, first evaluate, analyze different opinions of experts on this project and if you like everything, then put a signature! I don't want to advertise the Scam and work for free unless the tokens are sent.