Bitcoin Forum

RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN A BOUNTY CAMPAIGN EQUAL TO HIGHER PAYOUTS

I think its time that bounty managers should start putting limitations on new bounty projects to avoid spams, the problem in this space today apart from scam projects is this forum is flooded with spammers and too many bounty hunters which makes reward unfair for hunters, what do you think? Agreed or disagreed? drop your points below

If I own the project I won't agree statement like this. They want to promote massively without spending more money. So without limitation they will got massive participant with the same amount of money. Profit? Yes profit for owner not for us. Remember they create bounty program for promoting product not for make us rich.

I would like to have a higher payout but bear it in your mind, the advertisers will not agree because they want visibility not generosity.
they do not care how much money the bounty hunters will get, what they care about is how to promote their project and get attention from the investors.

Hm, you have a point, too many bounty hunters promoting a bounty project will benefits the team more than bounty hunters themselves, whether they spam or not its not a problem for project teams, i kinda get you but its really not healthy for thousands of bounty hunters to share a pool of 40k to 100k, if that should be the case i expected the team to add more to the bounty pool

I don’t think that there are many participants in the bounty companies now, most likely there are many fake accounts that try to impersonate real people. Again, if you think that the number of people plays a role in the amount of earnings, then you are mistaken. The fact is that the projects themselves are most often the organizers of the drain of the price of their tokens or coins, and they try to shift the responsibility to the participants of the bounty. You look at what percentage is allocated to the bounty of the company, it is from 1% to 10%. How can such a quantity of cryptocurrency lower its price when entering the exchanges? No way, unless someone else is pushing the price down. So the problems of the bounty companies are not in their participants and not in their quantity.

But projects want more exposure without increasing reward pool so they introduced stake based rewards so more participants more exposure but the same money from the bounty team.If bounty managers put restrictions then project bounties will be managed by the team itself.

More exposure more money, that is the way it should be, what OP should have written in his/her post is bounties with low allocation should always have limited participants, let the work fits the reward, some bounties will even add more weeks without extra rewards

Investing in crypto is risky and you have to know the risks before jumping in, its same thing with bounties as well, the only difference here is you aren't investing any money so bounties have risks as well like your time and energy might all go in vain, whatever happens after or before bounty ends is always part of the risks, just get used to it

The more participants in the bounty campaign meaning is the more information and news about that project are shared. Therefore, setting a participant limit is unfortunately not helpful for those projects. And i don't think that the participant limit will prevent the scammers too much. It's the bounty manager's responsibility to eliminate the scammers. The manager needs to check each participant in the spreadsheets and good bounty managers are already doing checks all participants.

If you have a project, you need exposure. The more people joining the project, the more reach and exposure you had as long as you have the budget. The problem here is how do you detect and scam project. If the problems here is spamming, we have forum patrol also here. Setting limitations to project I think is like limiting the project's potential too.

Having more advertisers is favorable to project owner so ithink this things will not work.
I mean more users join in thier bounty means more exposure about the project and that what they need to get investors invest in thier project . So they will not doung this because it will help them to get more funds.

There's no doubt in saying that the more the participants in a bounty campaign, the lesser the reward. This is logical based on the amount allocated to the different campaign. When the bounty manager gives stringent conditions for participation in the bounty, it reduces the participants and increases the reward which could be received by individuals. This could be easily seen in many bounty where the reward is in Bitcoin. Most of the signature campaign are only for higher level members, this would no doubt reduce the issue of spamming.

That will not solved anything as the projects need to do massive advertisement to spread the word to attract a lot of buyers and investors. Remember about just because you give a limitation to the campaign doesn't mean that will bring you a high payout to the participants because that depends on the allocation that already allocated to the campaign and how much the price after it's traded on the exchange site.
I disagreed about that because there is a lot of things need to be considered before you can decide that.
You can add more allocation when you wanna give a good payout to the hunters but remember more people will much better.

I think that it would not be bad for an independent expert to be created on the form who will check all created bounty topics and those that in his opinion are fraudulent, let him delete it. And it would also be nice if each project would take something more serious about identity verification, so that unscrupulous program participants could not participate in several accounts at once.

Yes it is true, the fact is that many projects do not limit the number of people who can participate in it because they can get many people to be able to promote their projects and I think this is a very good and beneficial thing for them because more and more people are promoting projects the higher the chance of getting investors to invest and use the funds to develop their projects.

I believe that what you listed is not all workaround, the first of course yes, it would be very cool but, accordingly, users who do not know how to choose projects would start participating in good projects, thereby taking profits from those who have long been in this system. And on the account of the second punk, I do not agree with you, because it’s stupid, the project will not get any worse from the fact that the same person reposted in two of his tweeters, but simply gives the smarter participant more money.

A number of bounty hunters are using bots and their social media accounts are empty and have followed and subscribed each other increasing their followers which do not make any benefit to the projects. The managers have to take care of this issue. The other issue is from the projects which fail because of the developers mistake in this solution they have to ensure to pay in BTC in case of failure.

To me i don't think restriction is the solution. Some that will qualify will still spam the thread or group. Penalty/punishment should be the best solution. If you caught spamming or its like; you will be punish.

Thousands of people's account is more than enough to spread the words about a particular project on social media, it will make sense if there is some limited participants like OP said, many are using bots to gain followers on twitter and facebook that is why you will see twitter spreadsheet overcrowded, the fact is it doesn't help at all

I think the author of a topic exaggerates the problem. Bounties now often do not recruit the right number of bounty hunters.Therefore, I assume that limiting the number of participants is not relevant now.

Lol same here, bounty hunters are getting reduced maybe its because of too many failed bounty projects in 2019 lol, i have few friends who quit already too, not everyone has patience and persistence spirit to continue hunting but i hope 2020 will be different

Is it too much of bounty hunters the problem? No its not, infact every bounty allocations from 100k is more than enough, present market condition is the enemy here and secondly scammers have successfully ruin the heart of investors, they are no more interested in new projects these days

limit the number of participants and reduce the number of bounty allocations, because the more allocations, the more participants will join and be accepted. make a rule with a minimum account rank, so each rank can only join a few participants, the goal is to minimize spam and so on, this way the allocation and the number of stake that can be stable.

I doubt it that they will limit the participation for their bounty. They want to maximize the exposure they can get in the forum that's why they don't have limitations. Some do have but this is for budgeted campaigns but for those bounties that will just pay with their own tokens, why would they care about the payment if they'll pay out of thin air?

The bounty campaign that has a limit on participants has a huge boost not just to the bounty campaign organizers but also to the bounty hunter. Because it avoids the serious fraud of other participants in multiple accounts, spam and much more. It also helps for bounty hunters to earn enough rewards and of course to make it worth the effort and sacrifice.

in my opinion, i think the bounty manager and team projects should derive a means to tackle spammers and scammers on the bounty before lunching the program. they should put in more effort on this to tackle this issue and retain the projects dignity

Limiting the number of participants won't help them since all are just going to dump anyway to they might as well just accept just about anyone coming to join the campaign. One solution for a low rank user in bitcointalk because you can't join the signature campaign then just take the blogging and youtube campaign, there is a higher allocation for these campaigns.

I agree and it should be implemented I participated in one bounty campaign it has huge rewards but even it is the huge rewards, I only got  small fraction because of the so many participants in the campaign, all those huge allocations rewards goes to thousands of participants, that no one got a big portion of the slice.

the most important thing about this problem or to avoid a scam project is to require the project to hire a trusted manager in the forum, i think that is enough to minimize scammer and if that can't be done then come back about self control not to be greedy and carelessly promote the project, because by staying cautious and having good knowledge that will keep you safe from scammer

Using your logic, they want to make as much promotion as possible and reach as broad as possible with little capital.
That is a strategy for the project owner. If you want to be rich try another business that generates more returns than you spend your time in vain for bounties.

No it will not boost the campaign if they make it to limited people to participate.
I dont think that too many participants is the  big problem right now since more of the members here do not want to join in any bounty any more, because of too many scam project before.

There may be a limited number of campaigns, but not all of them, and if limited, there may be 1000-2000 participants. So now joining a bounty campaign that has a lot of participants will only get a penny and better find another project that still has a few participants

Maybe bounty hunter will agree in your opinion.because they will get High reward.but think that you are one of team member.Team member not going to do this.because more people join in campaign means more brand Awareness and marketing will be huge.So it’s just your personal Opinion.team members or bounty manager not going to accept this.                   

I think for certain parts of the bounties, there should be a limit. I to a degree agree with this, as companies can also hire professional PR jobs to also get the word out and thereby there can be some of the budget spent on professional marketers and some of the marketing budget can be shared among the community bounty hunters. Also quality over quantity for me is important. Rather than having a ton of people spamming left, right and center, it is better to have a limited participation of people doing a really good job to get the word out in a concise and most professional manner. We don't want the marketing to have a really heavy backlash against the project we are trying to help to promote to the General Public.

I agree to your point, but the bounty managers won't agree. If they limit and put restrictions, the users advertising for them will decrease. Thus, their exposure will also reduce. This means, that they will be paying more to less user for less exposure. Thus, they will consider this ineffective form of advertising.
Honestly, they don't care about spam. As long as they get some kind of exposure, they wouldn't care less. Just avoid bounty programs, and you will see them fixing themselves automatically!

How we can find the value of rewards? Based on the percentage they allocated or number of tokens or just ICO based USD value? Nothing will give any idea about the actual value!

First point, Bounty managers arent the ones who do control on the allocation of funds when it comes to marketing stuff.
Second, ICO projects do focus on maximum exposure thats why limiting participants isnt an option.
Third, Even the rewards are big in token amount but you cant still be sure if those coins would have value or none.
So in the end of the day you cant be sure if you would able to earn some penny with bounties.

Unfortunately, but your proposal is opposite to what project developers want to achieve. When someone runs a bounty, they do it to promote the project and make it as visible as possible. According to your proposal, it would limit the number of participants, which would also limit the range of the promotion. Unfortunately, but no one will be interested in such an idea.

Some of bounties manager have done that especially the trusted manager. They will choose the user of this forum who have a good quality post and I saw them very careful when choosing participants to promote the project.

However, since there are a lot of newbie (copper member) who become bounty manager who just choose bounty hunter randomly, even they just make a spreadsheet as a benchmark so as the bounty manager didn't weed out every participant who want to join.

I'll be agree if there is a rule/criteria for being bounty manager. So, the moderator of this forum will just choose the trusted manager to avoid spammer also scam project.

Even if such rules are introduced between Bitcointalk users, any developer can decide who to employ. If he wants, some of his employees will do it on his behalf without the need for an additional person as a bounty manager. If the bounty campaign conditions will be good enough for hunters, they will join regardless of whether it is run by Newbie or Legendary member.

The only who like that proposal is obviously the bounty participants. If in a bounty they have restricted how many people can join in there, bounty hunter will get higher payment after ICO/IEO ended or as promised.
But even they have do that, it doesn't guarantee the ICO will ended successful

I think the number of participants for each bounty should be limited. Such a restriction will benefit many subjects.

*The amount of prizes to be distributed will be kept constant, and the number of prizes will be higher per participant in bounty with fewer participants. In this way, such bounties will become the first priority for bounty hunters.

*Due to the small number of participants, the control of fraudulent detections can be made easier by the managers.

*In a competition where there are normally many participants, the total amount of prizes you won will not increase much if you make even a lot of effort. However, if the number of participants is low, those who make extra effort will work more and more effectively because they know that they will get their efforts.

*In short, the lack of supply will increase demand and this will lead to an increase in value.

The problem is that hunters rarely care about limitation and if limited they will start giving death threats to the managers. No manager wants that and thus has to take care of both sides.

Unfair? This forum is very lenient to bounty spammers and still allow them to participate even if their post history is 100pages of twitter reports. I am sure no other forum in the internet is going to tolerate that level of spam. Bounty hunters dont care about these aspects and are only bottom feeding the projects. Its about time they stopped doing shitcoin bounties and start posting to get a good rank for joining a signature campaign that pays in bitcoin.

let say they limit the participant but what if their qouta post per week is 30 and above  ? that should still countribute to spam on the forum imo especially those he hire are just spamming and dont know how to write a constructive post properly or dont know how to timed and segregate thier post on different boards  .  its hard to be a manager and he cant possibly detect the exact quality of its participants  . budget also depend on the founder of the project .

But what if the the project team themselves says the other way around? What if that's what they wanted to. To have a large number of participants to take part on their campaign so their project will reach a larger scale and have more exposure to the future investors.

Since way before we have had bounties with a limited and non limited participants. True the limited ones could give you move rewards, but the non limited could also give you a good payment. Back in the days, bounty used to give a huge rewards pool and they also have a good price once it hits the exchanges.

Right now is not really an option, whether it's limited or not, with a low bounty pool and lower price when it hits exchange, so yeah. You should decide whether it's worth your effort or naw.

Sure! I even expect a certain trend among scammers .. Until now, they gave huge budgets for bounty campaigns, but hunters began to realize that those with large budgets usually turn out to be scams and rather do not join that campaigns. I think scammers will now try to authenticate their reality by creating real budgets .. so much lower.

In this case bounty hunters are used as consumables and there will always be a replacement for your place. but you can relax because in the future there will most likely be no need for bountists at all.

As so many projects will release, bounty hunter will provide it one by one. Somehow it will be a problem if there are so many project will scam no one willing to participate on it.

Of course there are many bad new bounty projects flooding the bitcoin world, yet the managers putting limitation to new bounty project is not the issue, but need for proper scrutiny. Definitely as bounty Hunter increases day by day reward is no more sufficient at distribution. Note: hunter shoot at chances. They may be fortunate to catch big or the other way .

I definitely agree but as far as I know the team and the bounty managers already anticipated that kind of situation since most of here in crypto currency community want an assurance due for some valid reasons. Nowadays, makes all of us so tired finding a legit bounty and most of us want a good outcome and hoping have a good return in the future.

Yea, but back then in 2017-2018 i ever joined in a altcoin campaign which allocated $2milion worth of their token. And after 1 month their ICO ends, they ended up paid all bounty participants (some of people earn $100k - $200k on that 1 bounty only).
Now, as you said, they lowered it to smoething realistic which around $50k -$100k but it's still turned scam

Actually the case is that in back 2017 almost all of the ICOs were successful and all of them after listing on exchanges got around 10x higher value which made that much income to the bounty hunters while now the case is not like that which was in 2017. Now the altcoin season is down so the ICO projects are facing hard time to raise funds which result many in getting failed while some of them cannot afford to list on bigger exchanges.

Legit bounty?

You expect people to give out gold mines as bounties? Those days are long gone and bounty spammers should learn their lesson that shitcoins are never the future. If you expect to make some money you should develop some skills, get educated with the proper knowledge to be able to work for some bitcoins. This could also help you get a real life job and that is always better than wasting time on spamming twitter with some shady project's generic tweets.

i agree but only those who has bad reputation cant join the bounty campaign, all the sections in bounty he cannot join in any of them.

Real talks which people should really think off in general when it comes to bounty.Even on first place they never be considered to be good for long term.
But you cant really remove into ones mind to believe that they can live with it for long term. When projects becomes shittier as years passed then it
same goes for bounties yet we know these are marketing area of such project.Solution? Its unsolvable so better to put this on ignore.
?

not only failed to raise funds but now most of the ico is committing fraud, I have participated in several projects ico they get large funds but after their sale ends, they have no news even their telegrams are inactive and no admin answers all the questions again maybe it also caused one of the investors to no longer invest in ICO

Wait a minute, the bounty manager is also an opportunity seeker based on their perspective, the authority to limit the bounty project belongs only to the forum administrator. Then, the authority of managers to limit the rules and participants associated with rewards is not always effective considering that every project also expects potential investors from each participant, they still rely on quantity.

Last year I found the intended altcoin campaign, but whatever the rules, if the project fails in the ICO results, all the economic parts of the campaign will be meaningless.

And most of the ICO right is cant even raised the softcap needed to be successful. The problem is not about the bounty but all the ICO project , bounty payment is only small percent and investors have the highest and if more project experience failed many investors also lost thier money . . .

At the past almost reach softcap and hardcap and so many ico scam people participate on it and waste some time of it. They take the money away from bounty hunters to earn all those investors who invested on their project.

even they reached thier softcap or hardcap some bounty campaigns will reduce the bounty reward other campaign the diatribution will be done 3 months after the campaign to prevent dumping.  And when they distribute the coin its already useless no value.

This is the reason why most bounty campaign is not profitable anymore to bounty hunters because of the value dropping too fast before they could even get their reward. Some investors if the token is listed they will automatically dump their token and that would drop the price. Imagine waiting three months for nothing?

I want to join a premium bonus program, but it looks like it's only for high ranking members. So can I work for a bounty hunter, can someone help me?

No. There was a time when bounty hunting paid off if you sold the tokens at a good price and there was less abuse in the forum with alt accounts and cheaters.

Possible if done properly. They have already seen the bad effects of hunting bounties now since they are worthless and not as profitable as they were. But bitcoin paying campaigns are still going good for a side earning.

"Unsolvable" would be a wrong approach. We should provide the bounty hunters of how they can stop the habit and move on to bigger and better things in the forum. This is a community after all, even if it might seem to be full of spammers.

While it's not advisable to join in bounties nowadays especially for newbies since you can only join on limited projects or projects that have social media campaign,but sometimes high quality bounties or legit campaigns only pays for more high ranked. Better work on posting quality post to gain merit.

That's a big hope and patience you have but unfortunately it all goes in vain. These CEO and their team are sometimes untrustworthy when it comes to giving to their participants the deserving award yet they choose to own it. And let their pocket gets full with their scam projects and promises. That's why bounty hunting these days is not really recommended for profitable business.

As far as I know, limitations is already implemented from those bounty managers but not all bounty managers doing that. Also, spammers here is already part but not as rampant as nowadays. In some point we can't easily control those spammers in which they also invest time and money as they can have their own reward.

most projects today only use prize hunters only to promote their projects and that has made many people stop being gift hunters at this time. I hate many who blame the fall in coin prices because of the bounty hunters and yes as you say investors are actually that is making prices fall. and after 3 months the tokens obtained by the prize participants become junk tokens of no value again.

Many reputable bounty managers have done it, but unfortunately many of them are no longer active. In the altcoin market there are many names of new managers, but what I see is that they are not so strict in dealing with spam, especially managers who handle many campaigns, just look too busy counting weekly stake. Spammers can also appear because their rules are not too strict, especially those that do not require kyc, or are not required to download certain wallets.

It makes sense to have limited participants for bounty projects this days but new devs are so desperate and they want more people to heard about their project, i can't blame them for this

Actually with limited participants is the middle ground of the existence of the project bounty so that it does not become a high cost. but it must be limited by the rules of the participants must be qualified so that the information brought by the participant will be able to reach most people, especially investors. compared to many participants but the quality of the participants is not good only makes the costs prepared quite large. will have an impact with many bounty project scam .

In my view limited participants only will have an effect for the participants itself because the payment for the people will higher depend on the distributions of payment bounty but when no limit participants implemented to the particular projects then the devs have a lot of space to promote their projects because more people to promote means more chance to them to get potential investors and although i do agree will limited people to joining the bounty but i'm not sure the devs will agree with this

Spammers are there but it is also not possible for a bounty manager to completely control them because they are also humans and the spammers always find out newer methods to register accounts and abuse the rewards. Though the forum trust system has tried its level best to keep them at bay.

Partially I would agree. The reason why bounties came into existence is for promotion of the project, get the community involved and reward them with a prize for that. Regardless of the fact that the tokens are worthless if the market dumps before you sell them.

However things changed when a bunch of bottomfeeders started abusing them.

Limited participant rule is necessary in order to avoid the spam, the experienced bounty manager knows the power of quality over quantity. The scam projects don't care about the quality, they need quick results due to the limited timeframe for their fake token sale. Reaching higher audiences will have a positive effect but they should have a specific group of people as a target in campaign.

Project main AIM? Maximum exposure and this is why it isnt really that possible for that kind of suggestion and come to think that managers are just workers that being hired.
They dont have the power on putting limitation when it comes to number of participants on a certain bounty.If the project owner would say that they do need lots of members
then as a manager theres nothing you can do but to abide on whats being said.No matter how big is the bounty tokens you've earned if those things doesnt have value then it would be still
useless.