Bitcoin Forum

It's a good thing that few bounty managers are now limiting participants for bounties but another problem I'm bounty projects are dumps, one way that bounty managers can help to avoid dump is three phase distribution, many would probably hate this but c'mon we all want good $$$ from projects we promoted right? Controlling dump this way works, what do you think? I've seen bubbalex doing this and even COVIR that plan to use bitforex to raise funds plan to distribute tokens in three phases

What exactly do you mean?

Is it a staggered distribution of bounty rewards? If yes, then I think it's already been applied in some projects, but unfortunately that would not change anything as the value of the token/coin is still lower than its IEO/ICO price,  the timing is not good now if we expect a short term profitable return, that's the reality.

whether 1 phase or 10 phase of bounty distribution.. a listed coin without good demand and market makers to drive volume will always go down to zero.. people who invest in crypto startup are those who likes to gamble with their hard earned money

I have seen many project owners already implementing this. It's a good way to control the dump caused by bounty distribution but, I think it's not up to bounty managers to decide how they wanna distribute the token because it's usually project owners who send out the payments to participants.

This is not something bounty hunters can debate on because it's not in our reach, only project team can decide that, I'm sure that DIA project from bubbalex have 3 phase distribution because of the team, it's what the team wanted

It's not just about the demand here, a project can have good demand or big buy other on exchange but if the bounty allocation is huge and all tokens are dump once it will still affect price even if the project is listed on binance

Why do you think that Cartesi bounty distribution was split into three rounds of distribution upon all the 24hours gigantic volume on binance? Another example is Harmony bounty reward, after getting listed on binance the team decide to distribute in three rounds too as per my investigation

It's all about the utility of the project, if demand is high enough there won't be any damage to token value if bounty hunters dump their shares but mind you it also depends on how much tokens were given out to bounty hunters

Do you mean the manager must give a suggestion to the team for dividing the distribution for the bounty reward into the some phases? I think that decision will be going back to the team and you must try to talk with the manager directly. I do believe mostly participants will not agree with it.

I was also quite surprised when the bounty budget was only $ 10,000 but they still made 3-stage distribution. It's really unworthy, if bounty has a budget higher than $ 50k then a 3-stage distribution would be much more reasonable.

There were many attempts to regulate the bounty sell-offs, but in most cases, it doesn´t work. Because you have to realize what makes a token valuable. It is the popularity of the product, partnerships, development, use case. So even the ICO doesn´t have a bounty campaign, it could fall to zero because they do not care about future growth.

Yes thanks for sharing, I believe only bounty projects with high allocation deserves 3 phase distribution but nowadays you will only see bounties with 10,000$ and up to 50,000$ Max, Cartesi bounty has low bounty allocation but since they are going binance it's certain that price will double or tripled, no complains

There are disadvantages for bounty hunters if this will be implemented in every project.
-The value of it in the market will surely decrease over time.
-It is possible that the upcoming payments of bounty hunters to receive won't arrive.
-The money that they are expecting won't be received in full.

These are some of it, I have experienced this before and it is not good for bounty hunters. Also, bounty hunters are not the one who's at fault for the dump of coins in the market, they only hold a little amount of token from the total supply (around 1-5%). I don't think that it will highly affect the market price.

If I'm not mistaken there was a bounty program who have a rule that when the coin has been distributed for all bounty hunter they will get the reward in their wallet but they can sell all of the token in the allotted time. They can only sell a few percent of the amount of tokens he has.

In one side that is a good strategy from developer or bounty manager but in another side I just think that they are aware if the project didn't has a real function. I mean, if they thinking that the project has a real function to be used by most people they shouldn't be afraid for the price token dump. They will focus to develop their project and always find another chances to working with several parties to get a mass adoption.

In the case of a three-phase distribution, that has been done by several projects in the past, we take an example that is still close to the Atronocom project with an AG8 token, they make a distribution in ten phases, but the price remains dumped, and another example in E3T tokens that make distribution in three phases, but the price of the token remains dump, so I think distribution in these three phases is only able to delay the dump in the interim period, not in the long term.

Shit project will always be a shit project even if there is three phase distribution they will become worthless very fast, I suggest you choose bounty projects for their utilities not how much you will make from quantities of tokens that may become worthless very fast

I like the idea.
But, it should be whatever suits them.

If they really think that the bounty hunters are the reason for the dump then so be it.
But how much is just 2-5 percent of the total token that will be distributed for hunters? That is nothing. They could easily go back from a big sell if the investors will stay.
I think they should focus more on that.

Most new bounty Campaigns are only giving up 0.01% of their token max supply, only a shit project will get affected when bounty hunters dump 0.01% of a max supply on exchanges but it's their choice

Yes, indeed this is not something that should be debated by all bounty hunters, because there is absolutely no effect, because distributing in three phases also will not guarantee a token to avoid dumping, for proof we can look at projects that have already do it.

Maybe it's his own rule, it will help prevent the price of tokens from being dumped if they don't have liquidity. And you do not need to worry, the projects that he manages very well. And prices will certainly increase many times in the future

I think it's a good idea to control the possible dump, the 3 phased bounty payment distribution like what Cartesi project was doing, Cartesi bounty campaign is managed by Bubbalex a good and honest bounty manager and it's very approachable thats why the bounty campaign that Bubbalex managed is a big hit for us who believe in him its a go for me as long as its not a scam project.

Brilliant! This is the best way to solve the problem. Limiting participants doesn't guarantee that the tokens bounty hunters receive will be worthy! Therefore, a solution to avoid price dumping like this will work and bring benefits for either developers and bounty hunters. I hope there will be more bounty managers and developers who learn this and apply it asap!

There are some bounty managers have already been done it and it did not make any difference, the token price still dumped and never recover from it like tokoin,. Arteezy made it like 6 months of installment but still price went down. Don't take it only to the hunters, there are lots of factors why token's price dumps.

It will help to reduce the coins they can sell in bulk one time when they receive the payment. But if you only get small payment why its need to have 3 phase ?

The idea is good ,but that's not enough if the owner really want that the tokens/coins they are selling will not be affected by bounty hunters .then, use other coins to paid bounty participants instead of their own coins in that case only investors are able to sell and trade  their coins .

Sad reality in bounty programs. Whether staggered or not, the price performance is still the same. Going down the drain. And the thing is, it is unfair to the bounty participants. They will end up receiving few pennies from their hard work. The decrease in price is not those hunters' fault. Because if you will check the percentage allotted to them, is very small as compared to the team's holdings. So hunters are not in any way will dictate the fate of the project, but the dev team themselves. If they have weak foundation and no strong use case, expect that they will go down very fast.

I haven't experienced this kind of technique but maybe it will work.
Given the circumstances that they always put the blame on bounty hunters then might as well implement it.
If the value still keeps on dropping with this new strategy then it could also be a proof that hunters are not the culprit to all the dump.

Maybe after that, they will look further of where the dump is happening.

This practice of dividing reward distribution has been a long strategy of many crypto projects to avoid dumping their coins in the market. I have joined quite a few campaigns that implemented this strategy and have maintained the value of their coins in the market. I guess it is just right for projects to do this.

If any token will be listed on scam exchange and the price of any token will drop sharply, then the reason for the token price drop is the scam exchange, because there are no traders on the scam exchanges and only bots trade and these bots making fake volume, and if token will be listed on the top exchanges, then there are always investors who will buy tokens at low prices.

i do agree this methods are recently introduced by project owners in other to control dump in price, but what happen when there is already a dump in price and no bounty reward has been distributed? who is to blame or what method should be applied to fix that!

i do respect the opinion of the project and bm who support this method, but to me i don't see it as best solution to prevent price from falling, if they are truly interested in protecting the price of their tokens, team should start by given less tokens for hunters and have fix participants in their campaign, this way only limited amount of tokens will be in the hands of hunters to sell which won't have any impact on price. Tachyon was a good example.

Yes for a single bounty campaign, it works, it's a good way to avoid dumps, mostly done by binance bounty campaigns, the duration is in three phases, the first 30 days of listing, follow by 60 days from listing day and then 90 days from listing.. you can check Cartesi bounty thread for example

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5212075.0

three phases bounty distribution in my opinion is still reasonable because the distribution distance is quite good and also percentage of distribution is fair enough, and also far better compared to bounties that already have an exchange but the distribution is done 1-2% every week even though the rewards that can be obtained will not cause a dump .

3-phase distribution is not a problem, the problem is if the 3-phase distribution is done and the prize bounty is a little then it's not feasible, just imagine, if you only get $ 50 and divided by 3 phases, what do you think?

for me personally it does not matter, as long as they keep their promises every phase. I've also participated in bounties like that even they pay hunters every month which is only 5%.but the problem now, even though they distribute every month but the price remains dump

Don't be deceived, stop believing hunters are the one dumping price on exchange, investors are holding larger percentage than hunters, team are holding aswell, only investors and team have what it takes to control the market because they are with larger amount of token.

When demand for a particular token or coin is pretty low then any little dump will bring the price down easily, buy orders on exchanges is the first thing to watch out for when debating on this OP point, if the token or coin has no strong demand even an 0.01% from the max supply will affect the price big time.

Unless you have a good proof to show bounty hunters are solely responsible for dumps, I don't buy it, three stage distribution. If they want to limit their coin on the market, make their bounty into a smaller campaign but don't withhold the reward.

If it is the best to secure that their project would survive then we should just accept it.
We should also care about the projects that we are promoting not just dispose them after we receive it after all we choose to promote them because we want to be part of their project or have their token.
I know that most of us promote them for the profit but we should also care about their projects safety.

So many project using this step to prevent dump prices on the market, but i think not truly effective. Even if the team makes more than 3 distribution phase, if the coins has no demand, it will dumped too. To avoid dump, i think team must working hard for that, not only think about bounty distribution phase. Remember bounty hunter only receive 1-3% from total alocation

There are ways to control dumps than distributing bounty tokens in three phases, bounty managers or team should lower bounty allocation to a certain price target and still use limited participants strategy, or they can just use fixed rate tokens to pay

Bounty distribution which is done in stages in my opinion is good enough to keep the price of the Coin from going down drastically and will provide benefits or confidence for investors because there is no large-scale coin disposal.

It could work, but not in all cases. If a project is still the moral shot project that has nothing good to offer than to siphon funds from investors. Even if it succeeds in raising some fund, it will still dump after listing.
Also, if all projects teams decide to adopt this method, their inexperience in other key areas will still make their tokens to dump, because scheduling bounty distribution in phases is not a guarantee that the token will not dump.

I think that any attempts to reduce the chances of dumps are good both for the projects themselves and for the bounty hunters. I never understood these people who sell their tokens for $ 10. they work for several months for 10 dollars

I really do not see this strategy as impactful, like you sighted about the distribution of cartesi, even without distribution to bounty hunters, a token that will dump will still dump, because after the listing ,cartesi dumped yet no bounty hunter had it, because if I understood you,you are saying hunters dump the price of a coin,also remember, the bounty pool for reward is just an insignificant amount that would have no value on the total supply so with good marketing and team, a project will keep doing well irrespective of bounty hunters and distribution strategies.

What three phases are you talking about? It is really unclear what you are trying to say. Kinda sounds like you are frustrated of the prices being dumped and you want phase based distribution so that it doesn't get dumped? I don't think this will work. As soon as people receive the tokens, they tend to dump it. You might say, they will want to hold it for the rest of the phases. Yeah, they might hold it, but then again, they will dump it as soon as they receive the token from all three phases. In the end it is the same result.
What I would tell you is to STOP joining those bounty programs. They are waste.

Distribution by several parts can reduce the risk of falling prices, but these solutions are not a guarantee of this. the most important thing is to develop the project correctly and then bounty hunters will not be able to affect the price, and the most important thing is that no one will want to sell their rewards

These are rules that have been determined by the dev team and the bounty manager, as bounty hunters we must understand that before joining. If you do not agree with these rules, then do not join.
Dividing the distribution into phases is one of the preventative measures of dumps because of the common selling by most bounty hunters. For projects with good strength, large volumes, this is actually not a big problem, but for a weak project, this can be an extraordinary threat.
Of course, such a thing must be said at the beginning of the bounty period because several times I got a bounty campaign that changed the rules and said that the distribution would be divided into several phases, when the bounty ended and approached the distribution agenda.

At the current state of the market, this won't work, well maybe it would not dump hard but it would also not sell above IEO.
The team also has to be honest, if they value the project, they should value the bounty hunters as reputation is going to be their key to be successful, aside from the proper development of the project of course. What I'm saying is that they need to be transparent to the bounty hunters, they need to announce the plan (staggered bounty distribution)  before the bounty started so 100% bounty hunters would trust the project.

I think that will be unfair to people who worked for months to promote a project, the reward should be released in full as soon as possible for the satisfaction of the bounty hunter but team can use other tactics to control price for example provide liquidity so that price does not go down below from a certain limit or range. Secondly if necessary reward tokens can be locked till a later date but should be unlocked in max 3 to 6 months.

Yes, we experienced the same type of distribution as CARTESI. Still, the third phase is yet to be distributed. I think it will be done around 22 July. This is actually good practice to avoid dump. But I always think that with 1 -2 % of total supply allocation for bounty, even if all that tokens are sold, how it affects the entire price. I mean the price could go down for a certain period but still, most part is hold by investors, private investors and by the team. So, from my point of view, bounty hunters are not solely responsible for price dump

If the bounty cap will be reduced, it will be better the team state that at the start of the bounty and which will be well accepted. When the bounty pool of cartesi was stated, any troubled, but in the end, they accepted it. The same is happening to DIA. They are being sincere about it, which is better than changing things after the bounty.

No matter how bounty managers or the team distribute the bounty it doesn't matter. It is not just the bounty hunters who dump the price, only a piece of a chunk of the total supply is distributed to the bounty participants, most are in the investors or the team. So, the larget contributor for the dump is usually the investors.

In my own idea, even the bounty project is divided into phases still it can't control the situation for dumping it's coin. Because bounty allocation is just a small amount of total tokens compared to the total supply. I think investors is one of the factor that the token could easily fall down it's price and not the bounty hunters.

Dude, that depends on how much daily trade volume. Even when the developers have been deciding to divide the distribution phase into the some phases and it doesn't mean the price will be stable.
What will be determining the price of the token should be the demand for the token in the market

true, usually the bounty allocation is only a little, rather than the coins owned by investors, but for some reason the project team pays in several stages, after the first phase is distributed usually the price has experienced a deep decline, and it is very detrimental to the bounty hunters, very little which is obtained and it is not in accordance with the time spent

Why stupid people still believe that it is bounty hunters that making the price dump of those shit tokens from ICO?

are you new to this process?because it isn't the bounty hunters that reasoned why their tokens dumps it is those fake investors that they put just to make their project looks legit but the truth it is  a trash and no future at all.

Stop fooling bounty hunters because their allocation is only 2-5% of the total sale that don't even make the price move if they sell it all.

Agree with your opinion, that's a way to keep prices from collapsing. For new projects, they won't have too much liquidity in the first phase, so if the bounty hunter sells all the tokens, it will cause the price to collapse and be hard to recover.

It's not bad but not so good either, tokens loses value too, before the three phase distribution ended the token might become useless already, if the bounty is a project from binance exchange then I will be satisfied with this strategy because there will be good value and volume

I dont think bounty hunters are the main reason why the price of the tokens were dump since they only allocated a small portion of the total supply for the hunters, not reasonable to affect the price just because hunters are selling their rewards. If a project is good and has real use  cases, investors will support it. If the distribution has 3 phases, how can a hunter make sure the tokens still have value and has volume in the end? Because it depends on the project itself on how good it is.

It is true , Bounty can not make the project collapsed. I have seen many projects collapsed before they decided to distribute bounty, dumping happens when investors leave the project and take profit from it.

Limiting bounty participants is good but making the distribution three phases is not good, as a bounty hunter, we should be rewarded in full as we work on the project full time and give the project what they want, and we need to understand only 2 to 5% of the supply are only in the hands of the bounty hunters, it has no impact on the price.

One way of controlling the dump is buying back of tokens in a cheap rate before it gets distributed or getting listed. That would enable the believers to collect more for cheaper price. Their was a system of buying the stakes of bounty called Tokpie but I guess it's largely a failure but still such services if properly done, could be a good business for the operators as well as an easier solution for the bounty participants.

It's better to use limited participants on bounty campaigns than to use three phase distribution but it's a different story for projects that are going top exchanges, Cartesi did three phases distribution and the token still had more to its value but believe me not all projects will be this strong

If they have a liquidity of over 500k USD per day, I believe their project will not collapse when paying bounty. But if they only have $ 10-50k of liquidity, I believe that bounty will make the price fall quite deep

True. If a project is a crap or useless, devs will be the first in queue to dump their tokens. If the project is strong, demanded and have funds, it will always support the price.

Speaking about 3 phases of reward distribution - this might be a condition set by investors. Project divides distribution not to save the price from dumping, but to attract investors.

phases distribution with limits participate good helpful planning for a project like if they wanna make bounty. I deep some bounty hunter excited always for selling even their do not ahead patients market situation. although i wanna share phases movement in monthly with 2-3 step.

three phases in making payments are likely to reduce dumps. it's just that it will succeed when there are many requests regarding the project. it will still maintain the price. to be honest, there are many projects that implement this but still cannot avoid dumping because there are also investors who sell in large quantities.

I'm not against your point OP, this is one of the few ways to avoid dumps but this move of three phase distribution is good for projects that have too low volumes on exchanges, this isn't something to decide when bounty starts but when trading starts, if there is huge demand then it's good and if there isn't, splitting up the distribution is better

Yeah... I do support this plan of distribution at least to mitigate the effect of hasty dumps, especially in the part of the hunters that cannot even hold for a day.  Projects that have applied this in the past actually recorded some outstanding success.  However, my concern is that, there shouldn't be too much unbearable space between each phase of distribution. At most I suggest 1-2 months in between phases, this is just to avoid losing trust in such project .

Project team planning for the good of the project will always be supported by everyone, but we also need to know that they also cannot control the price of tokens in the market even though they make distribution in three phases, because if tokens that are liked and liked by everyone will obviously increase although the price is distributed in one phase, and vice versa, so the effect of distribution in the three phases is only temporary, not forever.

Investors are the one controlling the supply when it hit the market, they are the one that can manipulate the price because they are the one with a huge amount of coins, and its the potential of the coin that will make the dumps happen, if they see the coin has no potential and stop developing investors and bounty hunters will dump the coin.

I've been in this crypto thing for quit some time now, many projects implement this three times distribution but in the end the tokens still dumps, real use case of a project is the only thing that drives demand to a project, that's what you should seek for when looking for a project to promote

No matter what they do, I believe the project will fall apart if they are not good enough. Over the years I still see many bounty distribution projects immediately but the price never collapses. Like the Oikos project, they delivered bounty after 2 weeks and the price was even higher than before.

Fair enough but it's all down to the project use case, I remember tokoin bounty campaign, every single tokens was sent out to every bounty participants without splitting the distribution and after bounty hunters dumped the token price keeps rising, it doesn't lose 1% of it's value, utility is the answer mate

Only for a 1.5 year. That is not much. Have you seen what was bounty section in 2017-2018? Madness. Each project collects softcaps easily and distribute everything.


Who else except bubbalex does this?

There are only 2 unique bounty managers, whos bounty approach differs from other. bubbalex divides distribution into 3 parts, while yulerz12 escrows all the reward before starting a campaign. Other bounty managers simply copy/paste rules from each other and social media tasks only have differences in amount you need to retweet/share and tags usage.

Since 2018 the only bounties that I've seen and joined that used 3 batches distributions are Harmony and Cartesi and they are both listed on binance, makes me thinks that any project that landed on binance exchange will do the same thing? I might be wrong, well to me the higher the demand of a project token the better

Definitely, but some project are more vulnerable to dumping because maybe their volume in exchange is relatively low. I think it's not a problem if the developers decide to make it three phase as long as its still giving the promised reward.
but as far as it goes that's the developer problem to solve the dumping and they might come up with their own solution.

It's not as painful for bounty participants to receive tokens in phases than to see the prices of the token they hold dump before they are able to sell it. I'm all good with phased issuance if the project believes giving all at once would dump the price. But what we should also not forget that it's not generally the bounty participants that dumps the price. If there were enough interest, investors would be easily buying the at most 5% of coins which they are getting at a price below the ICO price.

I think there are only a number of projects that are truly trusted and have very useful project developments that can be registered at the Binance exchange place and of course the cost of a project to register the project at the Binance exchange place is also very expensive.

I wish COVIR bounty hunters all the best because they plan to use bitforex to raise fund, we know that bitforex is just like another Probit exchange, I'm sure they won't raise enough money using that exchange and again they plan to distribute tokens in three batches? You can't compare this with Cartesi that raised fund using Binance exchange

although distributing in stages does not mean it will avoid the dump because the dump occurs not because of the hunter but because of market demand and games from large investors. if the project is good even if the distribution is done at once it won't dump

Some projects give a huge amount of tokens for their campaign and during the early stages of the project, they have low liquidity in the market during which if all tokens are released at once then it will cause huge dump on this case stage-wise distribution is the best.

That's not a good idea to prevent project to fail or token to down it's value. Even the distribution for bounty participant will be divided into  many 3 or 12 phases there is no change in tokens value because it depends on the demand,marketing strategy and the support of the team to avoid their token become worthless after a few months. Marketing strategy is the very important for a project to gain higher demand. Don't always blame the hunters because not all hunters are selling at a lowest price and dump the token.

You mean the manager shall not distribute the reward token at one time?
 It's a good idea to atleast to control the dump, distributing it in a three phase will make it more reasonable for the bounty participants not to dump the coin together after receiving it. Indeed a good idea.
 
 But come to think of it, whether this idea will work or not. We are in crypto market and we can't avoid dump price, right? Not just the participants will be the cause of the price dump after selling it but also the team, devs and the owner who has huge coin can easily dump the coin whenever they want to.

If a project lacks good use case or well developed utility it will surely loses value fast even if the team decide to do a ten batches token distribution after bounty ends, I choose bounty projects carefully depending on how good it's use case is so whatever the team decisions might be won't affect the price or myself, as far as I get my tokens

I don't think if that strategy will become effective to avoid dumping of price in crypto market. But i think  the tiken price won't go down if there will be an effective marketing strategy from the project team with their support. Also i don't think that bounty hunters are the only reason why token lose it's value.

A good project doesn't need to complicate its distribution by split into 3 or 5 or whatever. If they overestimate their bounty funds and worry about too much of it would cause dump then try something else but not this.

I don’t think three phases distribution is working in single bounty project. I would to remember Tokoin it’s so potential project, provably they paid 30-40% tokens within first two months but they increased phases but can't protect the price. But now so many good projects applying these way, it’s better than 6 months or 1 year locked.                               

1 year locked is a very long time, bounty hunter also needs money, I'm sure if the project is good,
bounty will not make a bad impact on the price

I don't like the idea of distributing tokens thrice, this won't safe a project from getting dump if the project utility is utterly useless, if the project token has a very good utility there will be high volume on exchanges because of the demand and bounty max supply isn't always up to 0.5% of whole project max supply, this can't make the token lose value

I don't get it why they need to do this. Lock or freeze token in a set amount time and try to delay the distribution of bounty reward is always a lame excuse because "muh dump". Controlling dump for a project with a low fund for bounty or airdrop is a waste of time. Unless they set like 10% of the total cap then maybe I can understand their point but for less than 1% or even 0. zone but you still need to control it?

It's the team choice if they plan to use this distribution strategy, it's not something that bounty managers can pull off themselves, the latest bounty from bubbalex also have this rule of distributing three times and bubbalex said it's not his idea but straight from the team, I'm fine with it anyways

They should properly allocates that budget, advertising is part of the marketing and having the right allocation is a must for the team.



It shouldn't be like that, the team is responsible whatever the hunters did to their rewards.


Most of the time it's only 2% or less for bounty rewards so it's not that big to make a certain dumped for the entire project,.

This is annoying and risky for bounty hunters at the same time, before the three distribution phases comes to past the token can lose its value and you will be left with few dollars, I'm not supporting this, it's better it team can only give up the exact amount of tokens they can release at once

Most times, 3 phases of bounty distribution is just to reassure investors, and team themselves the assurance that the project will survive on the long run. Also, it is employed to scare or reduce the amounts of bounty participants

I doubt if that COVIR Project will have good value once trading begins on exchange, I know the project have real use case and of course a fully functioning company but they plan to use bitforex of all exchanges, there won't be much demand for this token

Another reason why nowadays it is too hard to actually get a decent profit from doing bounty work. Most of the bounty for bounty hunters to join put them at a huge disadvantage where every kind of risk is on bounty hunters. No such thing called fair and square anymore. A few months-long bounties with stages of distribution and locking before a set of time... Pure nightmare.

That's true dude, but you don’t know Azbit project which was launched around 1.5 years before. These project participants are unlucky so they’re still nothing receive yet. CEO excusing several times to price will be crash after bounty distribution, such old project still worries for the hunter tokens lol. It’s seems deceived.               

You know that many projects are already applied this method on their bounty distribution. But if we talk about the dump, in the end it's all about the demand and the quality of the project itself. The price won't be dumped if it has a good volume especially the buy order, in order to cover the huge selling activity from bounty participant.

This ideas is the strategy most new project used these days but despite that if you check the price of their token/coin in the market youll see the strategy as a footless effort which didnt save the project from downtrend and thats because theres no way a 7-10% out all maximum supply will affect the price of a project in market.
What new project owner needs to a strategy that will make investors and early miners keep their holding that selling it.

That's true mate, good projects won't feel the impact of the dumpers when their project has more case use in real world than just virtual case use. Those projects with the right team members will survive any attacks from bounty hunters anytime than mere scam projects. Also, the value of the tokens in distribution matter for any project to strive during the dump, the lesser the tokens the better the token price.

But they could just give amount rewards that they're willing to be part, don't set the amount for bounty rewards too high then try to delay it. Literally bait and switch tactic akin to scam.
Yeah, if they don't feel confident about letting loose 2% of the total cap on the market from their project, I think they are okay for being small fish.

Can you show me a project which price has been increased while the bounty was distributed within three weeks? I don't know if any of such project exist. I don't think it's a good solution to avoid price dump.

One thing you should also understand is that dumping of token prices is not always from bounty hunters alone . Good and strong projects like XXA and the likes distributed bounty rewards at once and their price didnt dump. Most times project team and investors who bought token  with huge bonus are usually the once dumping the price.

Take for instance , Dogdata the team and investors dumped the price  so bad even when bounty rewards have not been distributed.  so in as much as i support multiple phase distribution , i want also to let you know that dumping is not always about bounty hunters.

But if it has been a decision and has been set since the beginning of the bounty, we cannot do much. If you don't agree with the system, then don't join.
IMO, it is a precautionary measure to deal with price reductions when investors and bounty hunters take massive selling at the same time, so it is anticipatory action taken by the dev team. We must appreciate this, at least if this decision is made from the beginning, then the bounty hunter can be more tolerant. However, in reality, many dev teams have made changes to these rules before distribution, especially when the project achieved good sales, of course, this makes the bounty hunter disappointed. It has been blamed because it is considered to be the cause of the dump, the reward is not shared in full, it is increasingly upsetting. Well, that's the risk.

Although I do not understand exactly what you mean, I would like to say that today many projects try to prevent rapid price decrease by using their own solutions for bounty payments. Of course, since each project distributes with a different method, there is no method that it knows constantly for its users, but campaign managers do not make any effort to produce their own methods. If campaign managers design methods specifically for them and use these methods for the campaign they will manage, they will both create a good obstacle to fast sales and reward distributions are completed with a fixed method that everyone will know.

I also didn't see any projects like that, their prices collapsed in the first batch and I believe it was not the bounty hunter's fault. Distributing into 3 phases only makes things more complicated

Distribution in 3 stage is a good strategy if the project wants to protect token prices. But it's only good if they have a really big bounty budget. And if they only have a budget of $ 10-50k, I think they just need to make things simpler, that is a one-time distribution

I have seen this kind of practices from devs to prevent heavy dumb to be happening on exchanges after listing and bounty reward distribution. I'm not sure how they are believing into this concept like when they are not paying all the rewards all at once, how bounty hunters will not be dumping like whenever they receive each round of rewards, again they will go simply dumping in exchanges. I mean nothing will be preventing bounty-hunters from dumping but the only good thing for devs might be getting some time before the final dumb happening.

The only benefit here possible is delayed dumping.

At the same time, if devs works on developing what they have promised in whitepape, then people will prefer holding their bounty rewards rather than dumping immediately. I mean if the project is promising one then devs will never need to worry about dumps to be happening because people are always looking for investing into good projects so continuous investors will keep your coins/tokens value higher always regardless of what bounty hunters are doing.

I think one of the purposes why bounty distributor wants to split the reward is to prevent the token for being dump and to allow users not to sell them quickly. I know project that implement these kind of distribution and it’s not even three phase. Its process is to send the reward via weekly payment and its split the reward about 10x before you can get all the reward you earn. After the middle of the distribution, they implement the KYC which is very new way. Most of the participants not agree with the rules and not participate in KYC and even me. I prefer to get my reward as quickly as possible and project team should not hold it especially if the allocation for bounty is not huge.

Well, I had been away into joining bounty projects that pays token. Before when I used to join bounty hunting, I always failed to get good rewards. I always failed and if I am able to get rewards it does only pay a little bit of $$. This is why I quit promoting. I only join bounty that pays btc though I am not after for the rewards because I am after for learning.

I am new to this kind of distribution. Anyway, for me it does not matter and this will help the project indeed because we all know that most bounty hunters dump their tokens after it will get listed. This will eventually kill the project if their were too much selling of their coin/token.

Is there any good projects that pays well? Most of it are being run by scammers though there are few coins are good.

it doesnt complicate things as long as their rules arent complicated and you dont need to complicate your mind but you can just do your job because its the manager and the teams job to complicate things  . i hope this explanation does seem to complicated to understand lol . i dont know about you guys but i think i already saw a bounty that pay in advance as well as bounty that pays verry late but payments didnt hold thier outcome  . its about how thier main plan do well  .

One protecting process can't push the price up. Bubbalex wants to protect the price from dumping. Only three weeks can't help in that case. Although Bubbalex is choosing a very good project about how price could be stable. In the future a more stable process will be added. But I don't think this is right that below 0.1 percent rewards allocation is good for bounty.

It's been a very long story and a biased accusation that many companies blame bounty hunters whenever the price drop after they distributed it, but they didn't see or point out that it might be because of the early investors who took advantage on their bonuses, since many already experienced a declined in prices of new crypto listed in exchanged many smart early investors sells their share for their benefit.
Having 3 phases is still fine than not paying at all, as long the funds were escrow or they will provide guarantee that they will pay since it's their transaction fee that will be spend.

Yes it's ok to implement as long as they announce it at the beginning of the campaign or when the campaign is starting not after the campaign and when they are about to distribute it, there is deception if they are going to do this and bounty hunters do no like and they do not trust projects that does this, that is why they are posted in the scam section.

I don't like being made a participant limited. It cannot save the project from being dumped. One of the things that need to be done to save the project from dumping is slow distribution. So I agree with you on this point.

Lol ...
I think the dump does not only lie in the concept of distribution. Have you seen how the IMO project did? They are not even distributing in three phases. However, the distribution period takes one year. We can generate tokens from the wallet like mining results. There are certain limitations that we get every day. But the result is a token dump that reaches the deepest layers of the earth.
Let's rationalize what is happening.
Token dump due to loss of marketing concepts.
List their projects in the popular exchange, and deliver a real implementation of the concepts they have developed.
Too long-winded makes people lose confidence. This will make people leave the project.


If the distribution period arrives, will the dump not occur? This is called running away from problems, not solving problems.

Without limiting participants, you will only receive a few cents for your entire job, and do you think it is worth it?

yes, maybe that is one way to minimize the price of a project coin itself, if the tokens are distributed in three stages I think this is good. if it's not wrong like the tokoin project, they do the same thing as this and in fact can maintain the value of the project's own coin.

in my opinion the fall in the price of coins in the market is not influenced by bounty participants because the allocation of coins given to all bounty participants is only 1 to 3% of the total 100% of the number of coins launched. so I strongly disagree if the cause of the dump occurs due to bounty participants. then it is not important to do the distribution in stages.

on my opinion if project strong and good and quality it cant be dumped, I think that salary need to pay after work, and better to do it in stable coins, thats all!

if more participants join in a campaign because it doesn't have a limit you as bounty participants will only receive little  rewards is that what you want to happen?

Limiting participants is actually  help to receive every one exact amount of payment from the job done.

Its useless because bounty hunters arent the real dumpers in the first place.So having this kind of set-up wont work because dumps would be inevitable because the main dumpers are the investors itself.

Just imagine on how much percentage of tokens are allocated for marketing or bounty? Most of the  time it would be only 1-2% and if you do try to calculate then you will surely realize

that it isnt really that a big thing.This is why when tokens get listed then expect for huge dumps yet investor would secure out profits as early as they can.

true some people who dare to invest are those who bet on the profits they believe no matter how many times the phase is done it will go down if the project is honest right, but before they will bet I'm sure they have assumed in advance for what they are betting and sure you will get a reciprocal that is profitable even though you can't be sure of the end result

This type of distribution will be more satisfying if the project is able to maintain a good price throughout the distribution phase, distribution from phase 1 can be good because at this point the price is still very okey, but before it get to phase 3 the price of the token must have dump alot and this is not very favorable to hunters,
I understand this type of distribution is to control price from dumping but in most cases price still dump even without distribution,  this is only beneficial to project team and not to hunters.

I think dump is still base on the quality of the project if the project has a promising future investors will be eager to buy more than to sell more

Exactly, but sometimes you can't see the quality of the project in the early stage, actually people are more attached with their emotion so when there is a hype or FUD, they act very fast without analyzing carefully before making a decision.

there may be some bounty hunters who like the method of distribution like that and maybe there are many who do not like the rules like that. indeed the purpose of the rule is to avoid dumping but the payment received is not full or even waiting, it is too painful because it is the right of the prize hunter if they want to sell fast or long. honest, I personally do not like such distribution.

Limitation must be need specially for small allocation campaigns. Now mostly long campaign but very low budget, so if here no limitation you can't expect good rewards. Legit project never crash after hunters tokens distribution. Dumping is not happened from bounty participants.               

That last statement is for real, legit project won't allow to crashed their coin once the hunters start to dumped their rewards, theirs plan ahead
and expectations not to really harmed the value of their coin. Small drop might be experienced but it surely recover back.

This is common for projects that don't have confidence when they enter the market.
it's ironic indeed as if the bounty hunter does not deserve what should be his.
I think projects like this will gradually become the next trash.

do you think bounty hunters can cause dump?  I think no because only 1% of the total tokens is for the bounty participants.  What i dont like is there is three phases of bounty distribution, what if a bounty participant will only get 20$ he will only get 6.6$on the first phase.

Limited participants can be play very important role, firstly bounty hunters rewards will be reduce for the due to massive participation so that payment will too small. BM can easily filter those are fake entries on the spreadsheet. Now actually i see participants limitation on the bubbalex campaigns.   

this idea is already used by almost every BM, even not 3 phases, but sometimes they divide it for 3-4 months, and one company divided the payments for a year ahead, and in the end what happened ? all your reward is divided, and a month goes for 2-3 $, super idea ! already there are no those companies when went on 1000 -2000 $ after listing, now if there will be 20-30$ for kakue the company, it is already good, and you offer them still to divide into 3 phases

It is good if the price of token is maintained, with this process it will look as if the participants are receiving monthly salary for a work done, the idea is not bad only the problem of future uncertainty, especially with the price going lower and there is a possibility of team not fulfilling their promise, if this happens, the participants will be at loss.

I think its good that the distribution will be made by 3 phases.I have seen that some people blame bounty hunters for the price drop of the coin.If project has an X factor and good demand then it will be always on safe side.And if the bounty allocation is huge then 3 phase distribution is a best idea and then nobody will have much coin to dump.I have recently joined DIA bounty and here distribution will be on 3 phases.But if the bounty allocation is small and you use 3 phase distribution then its a very unfair decision.Nobody want 5$ every month.So if small allocation and price is not good then 3 phase distribution is very bad for hunters.

For some reasons three phases of bounty distribution is good first to prevent bounty hunters for dumping, second to maintain the price or maybe price will go up because no one is dumping. But somehow there is also negative on three phase distribution especially on the part of bounty hunters, if the project cant stand for so long, price will dump rewards of bounty particapants will become lower and lower.

Why the fact that bounty hunters dump tokens is counted as negative? They worked to get a reward and can do with it whatever they want. It is like a person receives salary and government limits him from spending it all in one day. With current bounty pulls, bounty hunters cant dump there price. Project is fully responsible for hunters selling tokens and dropping price. Project doesnt do anything to protect altcoins price. Project did not do anything to impress hunters to make them keep rewards. If the project is promissing, bounty hunter will never dump his reward.

Main dumpers are investors itself and project do always took the blame to bounty hunters? Thats totally a bullshit treat to bounty hunters since from the beginning
without even knowing or realizing that investors are the ones who do always come after for profits once the tokens/coins being listed out already on an exchange.
In mention in op about three phase distribution then i would surely bet that this one wont able to stop the dump. Dont forget that investors that do purchase up tokens
plus having big discounts and bonuses will be always in the head of the line when it comes on selling out their stashes.

Yes, only bounty hunters are always blamed for everything, especially I noticed this behavior from the investors themselves, who themselves just want to sell more profitable, and ask the team to either block the tokens or divide them for a year, so that they could not normally sell what they earned, and at that time, investors really sell their tokens at a good price.
Currently, the whole truth is in the money, gave money, sold more or less, and those who worked and promoted the project to have such a price of the token, they are left with nothing

Whatever the policies regarding distribution I guess it doesn't matter. What hunters face and complain about is the fact that managers often delay payments and don't live up to their initial promises.

The hunters are running the campaign because they have read and accepted the policies, giving another policy after the job is done is not a good project which means the project team itself is not confident in their potential of their coins/tokens and I have noticed many of them have died slowly before even distribution is done.

Just many greedy, do not want to pay knowing that this is somehow, but will affect the price of the token, and why then restore it to wait, when you can just throw hunters? So they sometimes postpone for six months or a year, and then when they already want to pay, they come up with some conditions, in the hope that more than half of people have already forgotten about them, thereby reducing payments by 2 times

For me i dont like it speccially when i need immediate funds, three phases of bounty only means your reward will be distributed in three phases. And your unlucky if the coin price gets dumped every week.

This planned method is much older and in the past some number bounty tokens were distributed according to the three phases method. I think this method is fairly good and a token can stop dumped if the bounty amount of the project is high. However I think it would not be a problem if the tokens were distributed at intervals of 10-15 days instead of a few months.

if the company really valued its tokens so much, they could, like some, buy tokens at a certain price, so that the price does not fall, and not block and divide the distribution.

Yes, like the DIA project they announce 3 phases of bounty distribution to prevent hunters for dumping the coin, and it will also make the price more stable and going up.

let's see within a couple of weeks, if the DIA will also continue to show good price growth, then I think it would be possible not to share the reward since the pool was very small to greatly affect the price with a volume of 40,000,000 $

look at it from the other side " You come to work at some for example plant, you are told, your salary is 300 $, you agree, come vreya to pay, and you are told that they are afraid that you spent money, you can somehow cause them usher, and because of this, we will divide your 300$ into 3 parts and we will pay you 100$ 3 months. It's just that, as I noticed, a lot of people live on this bounty, it's their work and food, that's why they sell everything at once so that there is money, and this is their right, since they have earned it.

Yes right run! Not every hunter will ever hold a token because there are many hunters who are excited to sell as soon as they get a token. So it is better to distribute the tokens in several parts for this period then there will be no possibility of dropping the price. DIA bounty rewards is to low so i hope hunter can't dump this token.

Is that why all always blame the hunters when the price falls? Believe me! Investors themselves,many, lower the price even more than hunters, as many buy things with large bonuses, and these bonuses also strongly affect the price, enough to blame the hunters, believe them now is not as good as it was before!

I have pointed out the faults of some hunters. Besides, not all hunters agree to hold tokens, so read my mention carefully and you will understand. However, investors are also to blame for the fall in the value of a token because there are many investors who are tempted to sell tokens at a low profit.

I do agree with your statement and we can learn a lot from there when the distribution will have divided into some batches and it's not only the price of altcoin will sustain even longer caused by the dump will not happen and then the hunters were also getting the advantages from there caused by they can sell their coin at the peak price. that's a win win solution

What I know that 1 year ago, there was a project that distributed the prize into 3 batch for 3 months, you can check Ferrum (not promotion). In my opinion doing this has a very good impact on the price of tokens in the market, it is proven that the price has continued to rise and of course the bounty participants will always support

What about a listed coin with a very good demand? If you are the CEO of such project will you release the whole bounty allocation bro bounty hunters? Let's judge others the exact ways we can judge ourselves, it depends on the bounty allocation, I believe if the allocation is much it will affect the project no matter how big it's trading volume is on exchanges

Its  good that it would only be on 1 month gap basis but majority that i have seen where they do it on 6 months basis which is bullshit but to think that this doesnt only limit out bounty participants which do mainly get the blame but actually the investors itself are the ones who are the main dumpers, no matter how they do delay it up it cant be helped if said supporters or investors would be just mainly trying to sell off
for profits and jump into other investments as well.It will vary if they would decide to support for long term aspect but these things are somewhat rare to happen nowadays.


1% bounty allocation will really make such effect? I dont think so and this had been always the bad perception of most people towards bounty hunter dumpers.