Bitcoin Forum

Does Signature campaign increase ICO credibility? I see few good ICOs recently using Signature campaign to promote their private sale.

Being a newbie, I would like to know your thoughts through experience.

You would not mind copying the ICO website and analyze on site to provide statistics for a website such as the alexa. You would see that many of the traffic to the website is coming from bitcointalk due to the numerous posting generated by users that wear the signature of the website. such a campaign help the platform to rank high on google do to the DOFOLLOW backlink

Nah.

The credibility always sees from the project itself, everyone and project can create their own signature. Signature only part of the promotion to attract and try to visit the project so everyone can know about the project it self, but about the credibility always see from the project aspect could be:

• The idea
• Team
• Service
• Feature
  
• Other

Type of campaigns usually do not matter much but if you ask my personal opinion i do give an extra point to the project if they have a professional looking signature campaign. For me it gives the signal that the team is serious and professional about the project so they have given proper time to design their bounty campaign in general and signature campaign specifically.

Newbies aren't enough educated to know the real one. Newbies are free to support all new altcoins by social network. Signature has the highest credibility more than others. Why investor will trust you when they even knows you. When a project will be supportive by so many signature users, project must be successful.

Signature was a part of promotion to create awareness but if you are talking about the credibility of an ico and it totally depends on the ico's reputation but sometimes the promotion can bring a good impression to the platforms but this thing was very subjective because it depends on the personal opinion after the first impression with the ico.

If the team has already used the trusted managers to manage its campaign and then it could be considered as a commitment to run the project.
There's a lot of factors that has played very important roles in this case.

my answer is no

Signature campaign can only create more awareness for any project, it has nothing to do with credibility. ICO is gradually coming back If I may say, couple of ICO recently sis well and personally I have expecting some positive attitude towards ICO from the community.

Signature campaign is only a part of the promotion, it never determines the project's credibility. If you want to know more about credibility, you must learn the project as a whole. Anyway, ICO has lost its reputation, even the project provides a signature campaign with big rewards, the investors won't consider to join the project only based on the signature campaign performance. Unless, the project chooses top exchanges to list their tokens, it is probably to bring effects on the interest of investors.

Agree, sig-camp increases the chances of being recognized by more people and makes a positive impression that the team wants to disseminate information about the project they are working on. However, the credibility depends on the team and the project itself, everyone has to do their own research about the aim of the project, what makes it better than other projects, how the market reacts, and how the project will evolve in the future.

No, signature campaign is just part of the marketing strategy. Signature campaign is being used to promote and increase the reach of the project, but it does not increase the credibility. It always depends on how promising the project is, over all including the idea and so on.

sig campaign may increase the visibility here in the forum but as others have said, credibility depends on the team handling it. even if it is handled by reputable manager in the forum, if the team will not do their part, the failure is always forthcoming. as the manager can only handle the campaign and the team is fully responsible in realizing their objectives, the final ball is still on them.
the success of the project depends on the resilience and sincerity of the team. and to what extent they are willing to undertake in accomplishing their mission. because most projects wane their enthusiasm as time goes by, up until they totally abandon the project. most of them are only active at the initial stage but when it comes to actual application, very few can achieve that stage.

No, the signature campaigns are for increasing awareness and for promoting the project. The campaign managers are hired by the team in order to run their promotions here. So, it doesn't matter for ICOs to be here or not if there are no features to promote. Just one more point is important here, the signature campaigns increase the traffic for the project website and Alexa ranking goes higher than average daily clicks.

Basically, it is just another tool to make it known by many people. The team will be the one to decide and the one who will be making their move towards the success or if they even have the plan to be one of the successful project. Even if it is handled by known manager, it is still depends on how they will do at the end.

Credibility of the ICO is definitely based on the project itself but sometimes having a sucessful signature campaign can also create good impression on the project particularly if the bounty manager has carried the bounty project well. The credibility of ICO nowadays is not that high anymore compared to its previous years but still some good projects still managed to survive because of its legitimacy.

Credibility can not be built up with signature campaigns. Signature campaigns can catch eyes of readers, bring more traffics on company sites, and the message in signature is too short to fully represent ideas, developments, roadmaps of one project. Investors need to visit website, social media, and other channels to investigate before they can have enough details on projects. From all details, they can make decisions.

Signature campaigns contribute to success or failure of one project but it is not the only factor and not a decisive factor. A company has many other tools for their advertisements.

Credibility is not what they are boosting for launching this kind of promotion. They should hire professional with good background on there field to there team or partner with a well known related project if they really want to increase the credibility of there own project. Signature campaign main goal is too boost there exposure to possible investors here in the forum.

 As you can see on current signature campaign especially those bounty of ICO. They are hiring bunch of user regardless of the reputation of that user to promote there campaign. So they want a credibility boost, they should hire only reputable member in the forum and ignore those spammer user applications which is not the case.

Signature campaign can be done by any project to raise awareness about the existence of that particular project within forum
Even scam projects can organize and set up a campaign on this same forum, one need to be careful in promotions and not been greedy about their payments in other not to lure innocent investors into believing what is not real. Example is Yobit, they had so many scam accusations in this forum about users fund, they paid signature campaign promoters with good incentives then.

I can only wear projects as signature if they have been listed on any Exchange, that reduce my risk and others. I can't do that for ICOs except for gambling projects.

It doesn't but it's not 100% true at all consider the main purpose to create the signature campaign is for the promotion to spread the awareness regarding the project to the a lot of users in this forum.

I think that it's not having any correlation with how trusted or reputable the project because it's actually depend on the team and various things.
Just remember if signature is a part of promotion and it's having a very small correlation to determine the fundamental of project.

Well, it can certainly increase credibility if done right. The campaign must at least:

• pays in BTC or ETH or any other coin which actually has any value and could be instantly traded in an exchange.
• hire a reputable campaign manager or escrow

A signature campaign may also decrease ICO credibility if it is just trying to fool people around. For example:

• payments with tokens from the ICO
• payments only after the ICO ends
• request KYC to pay bounty hunter. They are using bounty hunters documents to inflate their numbers and call them investors, clients, or just to sell their data. Anyway, that's just terrible.

So, if someone wants to make a signature campaign, just hire someone who knows the job.

The signature campaign is a promotional medium, this cannot be used as a parameter for a project to be in the good category or not. To find out whether a project is good or not, you must directly read and analyze existing data. Starting from whitepapers, communities, communication media, marketing strategies, teams, business models, competitors and so on.

A good signature campaign doesn't guarantee the project is safe.

It can help in someway especially in promoting a specific ICO and attracting investors that is using this forum which is looking for a good altcoins but it cannot really determine the success and credibility of an ICO project. Even a good and well-known BMs whose managing a good signature campaigns cannot tell you easily that ICO is safe and will not fail.

Nope signature campaign doesn't increase it for me they are just promoting the project.
They are just publicity to attract investors they don't have anything to do with the projects credibility.

Any signature campaign that pays in the form of its own stakes or tokens is hardly going to be worth your time these days because of the sheer amount of scams that have taken place with this model.
Though if a Sig Campaign is serious enough to pay its participants in BTC and ETH, they can then actually attract attention in the form of better participants from the main section of BCT forums. The people who take BTC seriously and will doubt ICOs to be scams are also the best people to judge and demonstrate your campaigns legitimacy if it is legit in the first place. This is because these people will not take fake promises as a given without analyzing your project. When they do, they will actually be able to contribute to your community as a developer.

BCT forum is filled with people interested in finding something worth their time. Hence a decent BTC paying campaign is your best bet, both as someone wanting to market their project or as someone looking to join a bounty that isn't just a waste of your precious time (If you feel your time has value, that is).

Exactly, signature campaign is just a way to promote the project and to spread awareness on the crypto community.

The credibility relies on the project itself. If the team are true to themselves and serious to achieve their goal. Then they will check every aspect to make their project succeed specially for investors to trust them.

To be honest no,signature campaign  is just  away to advertise their ICO here in this forum  and get more sales the credibility of the project will only depend on the project owner and team behind that project. and that's not related if they have campaign here or not .


In addition almost all of the ICO have bounties here so does it mean All of them is legit?

No, signature campaigns doesn't increase ICO credibility, can you atleast share the name of the ICO here? You need to be careful around ICO bounties, lesser investors find interest on ICO projects because they are mostly scam, you need to learn how to select good projects first

1. Make sure teams are blockchain professionals
2. Make sure the project utility makes sense and useful
3. Make sure the project have good lists of partners

Bitcointalk forum is one of the major sources for crypto market. And most of the crypto investors have been following this forum. So i think signature campaigns are good advertizements for ICOs.

I won't say credibility but, the signature campaign does allow project owners to market their project more easily because a lot of people use the BTT forum and when we use the ICO's signature it gives them more exposure here in the forum.

 Signature campaigns means nothing about credibility. It only means that they have enough money for marketing on btt

Yes, if their ICO is legit. Otherwise, their ICO would gain nothing but broken trust.
Running a signature campaign for the ICO only affects no more than 5% of the project's credibility. That said, this signature is only a gate to get credibility,  not as a final determinant.

You are talking about bounties? Or signature campaigns which pays in bitcoin weekly?

There are lot difference in the signature and bounty campaign itself even though the both campaign ask the same task to do done to get the rewards.If there is an signature campaign to promote new ICO then it means the project team is serious with their project since they are spending their own money to promote the project but if it is a bounty then no need to give any attention to it.

Some investors and knows about cryptocurrency are in here in the forum so signature campaign is one good way of advertisement. Besides, there are bounty hunter turns out investor after the project has been put to exchange and some bounty hunters dump their tokens get from the rewards. This somehow could be promising but in my own opinion it should not be advise. Anyway, whats best to a project is when it gets listed for sure that there could be only two things that happen either it will pump up or pump down.

I think we need to see the different needs a project which is trying to raise money needs. Signature doesn't provide credibility but it provides marketing for any project which is certainly needed.

Yes, the function of the signature campaign is the same as other types of bounty campaigns, it's just that our signature campaign promotes the project in this forum while the social media campaigns are in different places such as Facebook and Twitter. But both do have an influence on the project being promoted.

Not all. But I have seen some ICO that was being promoted by signature campaigns and build their credibility. However, a good projects always depend on different aspects as what others already stated. More particularly, we will also know if ICO project has a future and credibility if the product has a significant use and the team is very open to what is happening and showing off transparent progress of their project.
 
 Signature campaigns is part of their promotion but the credibility always depend on the objective of the project, the team behind and the sincerity and eligibility of it.

I don't see at all an interesting ICO at the moment, I also don't see any signature bounty from the ICO project, where you say it's good, to be honest maybe a lot of bitcoin holders are in this forum or a lot of investors are here, so I think using a sign campaign good enough hands too for introducing the project to investors and the people here

Bounty campaigns, sigcamp, social media, blogs, and others. this is a form of promotion and marketing strategy of a project. I don't think the signature campaign really matters to increase the credibility of the ICO, because basically investors see the use case and how important the project will be in the future. Investors can not only see from the bounty, it needs serious research and analysis. But with the bounty, the project will be widely reached and targeted, namely crypto enthusiasts.

Absolutely not and it investors should not even consider signature campaign as a sign that the project is legit, there are other ways to prove if the project is legit like the people working on the project, the whitepaper and their platform, even a scam project can launch a signature campaign so don't make the perception that signature campaign can make a project legit.

I think yes, because so far the signature campaign has been the bounty that the few scammers and spammers have found. with clear rules for several sections that are allowed to post there, making this bounty a neat looking bounty. If you see, many social media bounties are fraudulent by using other people's social media accounts and that will be detrimental.

i think signature campaign used as marketing tool in bitcointalk forum or other cryptocurrency forum. in my opinion its  have no correlation with ICO credibility , except they managed by most reputable bounty manager and also required high qualification for each participants. quality and finance ability in paying bounty campaign will increase project credibility.

Yes, what you are saying is very true, because it would be very wrong if someone judged the legitimate project through a signature campaign, because there were many scam projects in the past and on average, those projects opened signature campaigns for all participants in the forum this.

No, the intention of a signature campaign is to attract investors and not lend credibility to the projects.  That's why we will hear projects turning into a scam after a campaign, because many look closely at their ICOs. And just like you said, signature campaigns are just one promotional arm of ICO, there could be others like social media's (twitter, facebook, telegram).

Yes, if you really have doubts, you can ask questions in this forum, and that's how community works.

Correct, signature is one of the best way for marketing but not to boost the credibility since eveyrones can participate (most of them). How to increase credibility is making good partnership with wellknown platform or have great team member

No, It does not have any relation at all. The signature campaign is a good way to promote their project however it does not increase the credibility of an ICO. The credibility always rely on the team behind the project.

The signature campaign does not increase ICO credibility. But it attracts many investors in this forum. This is one of the most used marketing tools in the bitcoin world. Some projects pay bitcoin weekly to promote its ICo project, and some of them use their own token or coins as a bounty. I'm more interested in the projects that pay weekly in bitcoin than the other one. I think it just increases the curiosity of some bitcointalk members about the project their promoting and not increases the project's credibility.

And I think that it increases the credibility of the project.
Firstly, more people learn about the project.
Secondly, when a project attracts attention, specialists pay attention to it, who, in the case of a perspective project, give their assessments and publish their thoughts about the project idea, team, etc. Which increases public confidence or decreases it.

The signature campaign not only increases ICO project credibility but also attracts more interested investors about the project. This is a large forum and the number of members is very large, good projects are sure to allocate a few tens of percent bonuses to the signature campaign.

well, indeed it is a very important matter that the development team must do because so far bounty campaigns such as signature campaigns only provide information to users that there are good projects that are being promoted.

Signature campaign is the same as other campaigns, the difference between signature is more specifically for forum members because there are many groups, from bounty hunters, developers, service providers, to investors in this forum, so the signature campaign is very useful for promotional media for fellow members because there are promotional banners that we always carry. if you join the signature campaign

Signature just a process of marketing. Investors trust those projects whose signature is worn by higher rank members. The higher rank member wears the signature The more it attracts attention. It's like other campaigns but only higher rank forum members can join. A project can be scam even after a higher rank members wear its signature. So it can not increase the ICO rating.

signature campaign will not increase ICO credibility, because the credibility from a new crypto project its depends from the project itself, wich mean the project team, roadmap etc,,
but signature campaign help to spread the word to all crypto believers in this forum, wich mean right on target

Nah it's not. Signature campaign is just a part of advertisement.

When we are talking about advertisement, everyone can make their own signature/advertisements either they are legit or scam. You probably have seen on services/bounty(altcoins) where that board is full of promotion and you also probably seen the scammers in disguise. Promoting their projects through signature campaign doesn't make certain projects become legit!

the credibility from a new project not come from any kind of advertisement, such as signature campaign or others my friend
and the truth the credibility from a new project come from what the project bring to this crypto world, wich mean idea, features, tech and many more
thats my opinion

Signature campaign is a form of promotion - an advertising campaign.
If someone believes that greater recognition of a project makes it more credible, we can say yes. However, these are two different things.
Just because a project is more popular doesn't necessarily mean that is credible and will be a successful.

No, but the opposite. Serious projects do not need anyone to promote them. The whitepaper itself promote them to people to invest in their ICO crowdfunding.

Maybe it works in 2017 and early 2018, but I don't know if signature ads on bitcointalk are still as effective at the moment. Because now very few ICOs are still active or unsuccessful, and the projects are shifting to a different method of raising fund.

They will be able to promote their project through signature campaign. And the main purpose of the project owners to launch the signature campaign is to promote their project in the crypto community. But when a project is not promising, the project teams do not get good results even with such promotions.

So in order for a project to be successful, that project must first have potential. Everyone's marketing strategy may be different, all projects try to go with effective marketing.

No, not even any sort of bounty you think of. ICOs aren't about bounties. It's a project and even if signature campaign plays a huge role part of it. The trust level to ICOs wouldn't change. In fact the insane amount of bounties of an ICO made it trust it lesser than before.

The partnership with big company can be a big help to boost the project investors adding that signature campaign while you have good partner ship can help your project to be successful .

Signature campaign alone is not enough I think OP want to open signature campaign. thats why he asked it if they have a good result having a signature campaign here.

No it does not for me and in theory it should not do so for anyone, a signature campaign is just a way to advertise on the forum, it is a away to raise awareness that a coin exists at all as it is impossible for everyone to keep track of the thousands of coins in the market, if the developers of a coin want to increase their credibility then they need to do so by being on time on the development of their coin, by fulfilling their promises, by being honest with the community, by not hiding behind an alias or fake identities, if they do any of that then they should have no credibility for you and no one should invest in their project.

No, signature campaign has nothing to do with cred with credibility of ICO or any projects but it will attract more users and investors and it will give the project a slight advantage over other projects in terms of filtering the project to avoid scam projects since scams projects will not run Bitcoin paid signature campaign, this is just my opinion.

Confidence in one or another ICO, even without reaching the signature, can be justified by the rule of careful study of the project. This should be the rule. If in doubt, leave the ICO for later or mark it as unwanted. And the signature and wearing it is an advertising move to attract potential investors, as well as to attract new participants to promote the project. Something like this.

signature promotion never make credibility for a project. it's a part of advertisement nothing related with credibility. mostly project offering signature campaign it can be through of tokens and some projects will pay btc payment it’s depend on team. and i think a project credibility comes from teams work and project readmap.

It helps to build trust in the project, when you see some trusted members of the forum carrying a signature, you tend to want to look into the project and research it, by doing so you find out the plus and the minus about the project and if a red flag is found it would easily be raised.  It does help the project

This is only a promotion and the project that was promoted may be scam and may not be paid in the end to the bounty hunters who worked in the signature compaign, and this promotion never indicates the credibility of any project, if you are an investor, you must examine the project well and the decision to invest in it is at your own risk .

Having a signature campaign is very important to promote the project. It allows you to pay attention to the project and go to the site to get acquainted with the details. And that's where her task ends. How much the investor will be interested in this project will depend on the team in the future, namely on how it will present its information on the site in order to interest the investor to invest their money.

The credibility and legitimacy of the project is not determined by the campaigns they organize, if you look at this forum two or three years back you will see many scam projects that were heavily promoted here using signature campaigns and other social media campaigns and reputed campaign managers at that time were involved in those and some even tarnished their reputation helping out the scammers. 

if a signature campaign has 50 members and pays $35 each member per week, that would be something like $7000 per month (4 weeks running the  signature campaign) and if there are 100 members that would be $14000 in just one month and $42000 in 3 months, I think it would be enough time and people to be able to bring in investors if:

1 - the project is very good

2 - the team members are people who have competence and a good curriculum

and there is also twitter, telegram and facebook and tiktok that can be used to publicize the project and I think adding another $50,000 in funds could be enough to pay people and have good results.

But what happens is that many people come to this forum without a penny, they only have ideas and want free publicity to then pay in Tokens that can have a very cheap price and in the end those who lose out are the Bounty Hunters

Answering your question:

yes! but many people who arrive at this forum do not have money, but want to run a project.


must be a project that has capital ready to pay for advertising something very good and admirable

Signature campaign has nothing to do with credibility, signature can do awareness of the project so investors will look on the project and see if they want or not to invest here, they can generate awareness and traffic and that's all they can do, it's up to the team on what they will do to make their project credible.

seeing the project as credible, I think it is difficult to classify it against a new ICO project. whatever is done, currently the ICO project is no longer in the spotlight of the investor market. those who are registered and cooperate with major exchanges are credible projects. whether it's a matter of support from a bounty manager or a campaign with a large allocation, I don't think it's an issue that needs to be discussed.

I agree but then having some contest and campaigns going on bring some trust too. I given you an example, I was not aware about roobet even though I had heard about them but after they do so many giveaways and promotions I got convinced and actually started playing there and that is because of their positive activity and promotions.

Sometimes you need some promotions and campaigns to be run to get attention as well as some trust from the community. I agree that investors would always verify and check the project before investing so you must have good roadmap and team behind the project but having some campaigns/promotions always helps out.

A signature campaign is only a program of bounty, the same as a social media campaign or blog campaign,
but in my opinion a signature can indeed give an ICO better credibility, provided that the ICO has a good background and is worth investing in.
All need analysis first to determine credibility for ICO.

If a project use signature campaign for promoting there ICO/token period then it doesn't matter this is a successful project. Because i have been seen many projects before failed. A project can be successful token sales if they have good partnership with clear project roadrun. Anyway signature part a great way where you can promote your project for impressed lot of investors.

The signature is just to introduce people to the project and it doesn't have much to do with the credibility of the ICO.
An ICO is highly appreciated by everyone because it has a good product and a professional development team, it has nothing to do with the signature campaign.

I think the signature campaign has something to do with the credibility of the ICO but it doesn't involve too much.
Sometimes every ICO project gets better reviews because their signature campaign is professional and has great rewards. Sometimes a project is rated better when there are many reputable members on the forum wearing the project's signature.

Well, I think yes because it will be advertised and the community will try to look for the good and the bad, that happens every time, someone will dig deep into a project looking for mistakes or signs of a scam, then he /she will share what he/she finds out, which means people will be curious if it's true by also looking in the whitepaper, members, and person behind the project, by the time an ico starts people already know if it's fake.

The credibility of the project depends on the project itself and the team behind it, on how they support their project to become successful. Signature campaign is just a part of it. It is only their promotional tools to attract people and investors but the project itself will show to the people if they are reliable so that people would trust their project and invest to it.

For me, yes. By investing in signature campaign, the Project team for me is quite serious with their project. It shows how they want to have a crowd for their ICO and probably succeed their project.

Im not sure about this as there were so many scam projects that have been also using the signature campaign to promote their scam projects too. The campaign is to create awareness and it has nothing to do with the reputation of the team.
If the project has already owned by the trusted developers and that would be a good thing but otherwise.
How serious the project must be seen from the how good the product or MVP that has made by the developers. Signature is a way to do promotion in this forum.

Right but if the ICO they are doing is solid with good plans and all they lack is promotion then actually signature campaigns are one of the best ways to promote your project, product, service and almost everything. I mean it is not worth paying to get listed on useless websites instead here at forum serious investors and crypto enthusiasts get together and discuss various things and it is worth more to promote the ICO here than anywhere else.

Well, I acquiesce with you on that because unless a project has some potential the marketing will never get expected results and getting viewers is one thing and converting the views into investors or leads is another and both are mutually exclusive because you can hire a big marketing team but without plans they are just view bots.

It could also be very bad as well, I know that is a not a rare situation neither. What happens with the bad ones is the fact that project itself is actually bad, they end up with a small circle of people who are involved, and those involved people invite other people they know, so it is reaching to 100 person level with 10-15 of them actually team members and others are all team members known associates or friends, then their friends come, and it is a big family without any strangers, maybe one or two bad noises comes up but they get shut down very quickly.

However one thing I am sure is that if a bad project gets away from that and makes a signature campaign, there will be a big majority that will hear from that signature campaign and show all the bad sides of that project, making it go down.

Depends on how they do it. Normally the idea is not to increase the credibility but it is to increase the marketing of it, you would want more and more people to be interested in the project you do and when you are giving money to people for signature campaigns you are getting a lot in return, people all over bitcointalk will be hearing about your project which will create this "demand" for your project, not a ton but at least people will hear about it and know about it even if they do not get involved and a bit of them will get involved as well.

It is not always a great profitable thing, you are not going to spend a thousand dollars on signature campaign and get more than a thousand dollars in return from funding, but it would be at least a brand awareness type of deal.

From my point of view, yes. But not all the time. The influence really come from the person wearing signature.
If it is by hero or legendary member, definitely it increases trust as well as confidence among the investors for that particular ICO.

Of course, the expectation of getting more profit from investments in a particular project is normal. Do you want more confidence and credibility from the project? See who wears the signature, their rank on the bitcointalk's forum and their trust ratings, read why the trust rating was increased. I noticed that the chances of getting a good return on investments in projects, the signatures of which are worn by people with a positive trust, their projects are successful and work further. There may be exceptions, as in any rule.

Mist campaigns i am seeing in bounties section these days are fake defi campaigns with only social media campaigns and no signature campaign, so it does add to the argument that only legit projects will come up with signature campaigns because it requires some work to put up signatures which fake projects will not bother to do.

Actually if the ICO hires a good manager and execute it properly then there is a serious chance of both getting more attention as signature campaign are done for sole purpose of marketing and gaining attention from the community. Also it gains the trust of the investors if they pay out on time and everything goes smooth.

But that said if the project owners hire an incompetent manager, I don't want to name any so if you hire such a manager and he unfortunately messes things up then you might lose existing investors instead of gaining new ones.

If your project has potential and you do right marketing towards it then you can enjoy success but remember good marketing can kill a flawed project even faster so make sure you actually have your bases covered.

Unfortunately, signature campaigns will not increase ICO credibility, because to increase credibility depends on the project team.
If an ICO project has the complete features that investors need, it will make the ICO project look real and will increase investors
confidence. Meanwhile, signature campaigns are only a promotional strategy so that they are known to many investors and are
expected to attract investors attention.

No, it will always be seen on the project itself.

Signature campaign is just a type of promotion to get in touch by more people in the crypto community. It is not being done to increase the credibility of the ico because the credibility will always depend on the project, their team, ideas, etc.

If there is a poll almost 100% will answer no it will not increase credibility I have seen scam projects reported even though they have an existing bounty campaign or signature campaign and it was even handled by reputable bounty manager, in fact if the project is proven scam it could ruin the reputation of the bounty manager.

No, it will not increase the credibility of that signature campaign

In the past I do look at some of the signature campaign managers since most of them could identify if that certain project is legitimate or not. But to be sure, you should really know what they project is, what is their goal of starting that certain project and usually who are those people starting it. If you can't identify them yourself, better ask here in the forum.

I dont think signature campaigns increases credibility of an ICO but the help of this campaign is to promote and attract investors. Also, I think the credibility of an ICO still depends on the composition of the team developer and the project itself.

It's more like a form of advertisement than actually credibility. You can't trust something just because you see their advertisement in popular members of the forum. The forum in rare case has stopped obvious scam from running a signature campaign but it's not a norm.
Signature campaign is one of the most effective form of advertisement as all of the views are from people who are already interested in crypto. They bring a good amount of view and conversion. That's why they are quite popular.

Absolutely not, the signature campaign only promotes the credibility of the project briefly on various threads globally and many participants will be interested in joining the campaign if the credibility of the project is good and potential. The current most signature campaign of the JACS.tech bounty (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5281444.0) managed by the best Managers, this project is promoted in various threads and will get the attention of many investors community, I will review the reached of token sale will be released soon.

Not all the project in signature campaign is good maybe they use only that way so they can become popular their project.
I don't think it increase their credibility because a investors still make a research so it is uselsss for them if the project are not worth it to invest maybe they lose also money for advertising their project . The true project even they don't have more advertisement they become still successful if the people know about how is really worth that.

The credibility of a new project belongs to the team and their profession and nothing can increase or decrease because the team are the only one that has true power over their credibility, signature campaigns are for spreading words about the project not adding credibility

No, I don't think it's something valuable for a new project. It's like they are paying for a simple promotion.
it's interesting if you receive a payment not in tokens but in BTC or any other top 10 crypto.

Moreover if a project will pay with their token... it's a problem since you are going to receive a simple token without any track record (and at least a little chance to get scammed). Even if has a small value (example has been quoted in one exchange) most of users will dump their tokens received since they want always exchange for bitcoin or ETH (or exchange for FIAT!)

I believe it can, if the ICO manager is one of the high trusted members in bitcointalk it can add some credits to ICO because he/she would get negative trust if the ICO turns out scam or doesn't pay, but it is not true for newbies as bounty managers.

Only the real team and the reliability of their project can determine the credibility of any ico signature campaigns are only a way to promote the projects, which attracts those investors who remain active in this forum to find suitable projects to invest.

Credibility is what people think of the project, anyone can run a signature campaign but there's no assurance it will improve their credibility, signature is more like an exposure of the project to the forum, and it's up to the potential investors to decide whether they put their money or they'll not mind the project.


can you name some? I

I think for me the answer i would be going for is No because signature is just Part of Bounty and the main point to bring awareness to the project and most people click on people’s signature to check out the project and its up to you to make your research before knowing if the project is worth investing in or not

I've been reading some comments her and all who posted agreed that signature campaign has nothing to do with credibility but it will only contribute traffic and awareness, when it comes to credibility, it lies on the team and not on promotion, when I was active in bounty campaign out of 9 of ten I've participated are scams and that's a fact.

Obviously the main purpose is to get some exposure and advertisement for the project. Making the project a success doesn't have much to do with the signature campaigns. Signature campaigns run during the ICO phase. Whether a project becomes succesful or not is decided after the next 1-2 years. During this period, there will be no bounty campaigns and the exchange rate of the token and other parameters will be decided by the merit of the project.

This is like making Viral, you know in this forum there are so many members. The members here are not only Bounty Hunters but also investors who are looking for projects here for investment.

Automatically will attract their interest if many people talk about it.

not only Signature but Social media campaigns are also very influential to increase and make it easier to find Google.

Aside from good advertisement to attract the investors there's none that signature campaign can help the project, it's all decided with how the team works and how they will continue to developed.

Everything under any crypto coins relied with the team and the community support it takes time to say if the project did success or it will turned into nothing and die eventually.

I have noticed that Bitcointalk has fewer users as it becomes more difficult to rank the account and duplicate topics. People are turning to Cryptotalk, Altscoinstalk, Bitcoingarden ...
So a signature campaign will attract less attention in the community as the number of users decreases.
The signature campaign only reflects the total amount of money that is worthwhile and attracts many participants. In 2017, there were various signature schemes from bounty campaigns, and by far those projects have largely died out.

No, I don't think a signature campaign can increase investor confidence in a project under development. The purpose of the signature campaign is to disseminate information about the project in all part of the forum (there may be limitation depending on the manager) and that will increase public awareness of the project. All investor will not be easy to believe until they have done an in-depth project analysis. If they believe in the potential that exists, then they will invest there and if not then they will ignore it.

A signature campaign can still be used as an attempt to increase the confidence of investors and trader if the project has previously been successful with an ICO or fundraising. To increase product attractiveness, promotion must be carried out by offering the features and advantages of each.

I am a regular participant in signature programs and I find that they do not help projects. The signature program is inferior to Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, Youtube Video ... because it only affects the Bitcointalk forum. Other social networks have more users and certainly bring more advertising value.
I consider the signature program of interest to encourage everyone to participate in discussions on this forum.

In what you wrote, there is a place to be, but partially. The bitcoin talk forum effectively promotes projects through signatures. First of all, this is due to the profile and narrow focus of the forum. It discusses the basics, development and promotion of projects by people who have knowledge since the inception of blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Therefore, social networks are thieves in importance.

Yes, obviously there won't be much impact on the project in terms of signatures, because it is only part of the campaign that is opened to members who are in the forum with a certain rank, so the effect won't be much, even though sometimes there are people. which takes more references than the signature campaign, and for the subject of seeing about the project I think each project clearly has a website and a whitepaper that describes the complete project.

The more signatures discussed will be displayed, which also means that people will see more signatures. People who skim through the project will decide whether or not to invest in it.
Isn't the purpose of the signature program to sell a lot of tokens and attract the community? So if it's a bad project, who will buy it? The most important issue is whether the project itself is good enough or not.

well, unfortunately only people who understand cryptocurrency will understand bitcointalk, while ordinary people who have no experience do not know bitcointalk, for information dissemination, social media and media blogs or youtube campaigns can be the right choice because they can attract investors.

That's what bounty is all about, they don't only focus in one platform because not everyone stay in one platform.
Best thing about our forum is that it will display right away if people will look for bitcoin forum as it's the most popular in the crypto space.

I've been in the forum for 5 years already, I am not only earning money from bounty and from different promotions but I learn a lot as well and that I can use when choosing the right investment in the market.

Trust in some ICO, even without arriving at the mark, can be defended by the standard of cautious investigation of the task. This ought to be the standard. If all else fails, leave the ICO for later or mark it as undesirable. What's more, the signature and wearing it is a publicizing move to pull in expected financial specialists, just as to draw in new members to advance the task

the OP ask about signature campaign my friend, not about the campaign manager
and in my opinion signature campaign is just a way to promote a new crypto project but in the right forum, because i believe all people in this forum is believe in cryptocurrency

check this words again

No campaign will increase the credibility whether it be the signature or any social media campaign as far as the project itself will not be challenging behind any ICO. So, always read the whitepaper of any ICO coming thoroughly before ICO investment.

Signature campaign is designed to majorly promotes projects as a publicity media, signature campaign most time get higher token at distribution because you can only carry a signature at a time while on twitter, facebook...you can promote many projects at a time.the credibility of ico is more in the function of the team and managers. Signature campaign does not increase ico credibility.

signature campaign able to big promotion in the forum community. its way of advertisement process. running a campaign doesn't mean it's increase credibility. scam projects runs signature campaign too, that it’s not a guaranteed to succeed ico.

It does increase visibility. The name and logo becomes more recognizable and you're increasing traffic on the project's site, getting more people to join telegram, getting more people to download wallets and click referral links.

It does not increase credibility. If you want credibility you need to have a known dev team or pay someone to promote you. John McAfee used to sell his own name to add credibility to projects, but this made him lose his own credibility ;)

credibility has nothing to do with the signature campaign. Signature is only part of promotion, to assess the credibility of a project you can see it from the experience of members of the development team or from their goals and readiness to launch the project. for the first stage you can judge from their whitepaper, roadmap, website. a credible project must have prepared it very carefully.

I'm in support of your opinion, bounty campaign is something else that is far away from the project credibility. Most projects outsource their bounties on this forum and the bounty manager determines the kind of bounty campaign that would be carried out for the project while the team concentrate on other aspects of the project.

Not necessarily, even good managers can be deceived from time to time and there have been cases on the forum on the past in which this happened and the managers were forgiven as they were just as unaware as anyone else, they can receive negative trust however if they know from the beginning the project was a scam and still decided to support it, if this was not the case it would become extremely risky for reputable managers to take any ico bounty campaign and if we let newbies to take on those campaigns then we will have even more scams on the forum as things will go out of control really quickly, as such having a reputable manager while good is not really a guarantee the project is any good and will not scam their clients.

I somehow really like signature campaigns and i do truly support the project that i promote with signature campaign. For example the current blockmembers campaign that im participating i got really impressed with the project as it is aimed to revolutionize and automate the construction industry which was something never heard of before.

A lot of projects already said that.

You should still be careful since you never know how true their statements are. You never know unless you read the reason behind their project, where they wanted to go or where will they bring this project. Some projects are so good to be true and most of them are just a scam targeting investors of their money then you never know they could just start another one for another scam.

Signature campaign can't increased the credibility of ICO's or any other type of token sales,signature campaign or other promotions is just to attract investor or introduce their project and the idea behind the project.
The tittle said "few" it has been explained that the ICO's credibility is not from the promotion carried out but the team's ability to achieve each of their targets of the project.
But credible project will hire good campaign manager, because they understand that good handling will give impact to their token sales.

Well... I may have to slightly disagree. In the world of cryptocurrency, there is a lot of emphasis on trust. If you have respected members promoting your project, then it may be possible for you to get more investment. So if a project gets higher ranking members in its signature campaign, the chances of its success will increase. But at the same time, there are users who want to take advantage of their popularity. A perfect example is that of John McAfee, who promoted dozens of scam projects in 2017 and 2018, causing tens of millions of $$$ in losses to the investors.

Signature campaigns are designed to advertise the campaign or the project in general and it is not designed to increase a company's profile hence its credibility. We only join signature campaigns because we work to advertise the project and make it known to many people using bitcointalk, that's it. I don't see myself as someone who can elevate a company's profile, unless you are Elon Musk and you invested 10 million dollars to the project thereby elevating its prestige but still, the product or service would still be a big factor in determining where the project is good or bad.

Signature campaign or which ever campaign it is does not increase ICO, IEO private sale, pre sale (or whatever its called) credibility, some of the projects even after running many different campaigns still end up as scam thereby, scamming both the campaign participants and investors alike, one have to be extra careful this days to avoid falling a victim to this kind of projects.

Trough promotion an ICO project with signature campaign I think give bigger impact how to make many investor interested and wanna get part to invest with ICO project during pre sale or ICO sale, without promotion exactly with signature campaign I think many investor do not know how an ICO project running and how long will take time for ICO sale. I know many investor said with bounty hunter make coin price down but is not true and wrong decision. When ICO project promote by bounty hunter and signature campaign get part with promotion will give good reputation and many investor will know how seriously an ICO project with their planning design, from promoting until how to give income for investor wanna be part or ICO.

The signature campaign has nothing to do with the project's credibility. It all falls on the team, how it managed, developed and how transparent are they. Signature campaign or any bounty program is just a good way to advertise or publicize a project, it doesn't add to the project's credibility as a whole.

The highest a signature campaign can do for a new project is to create awareness to unknown people that may want to invest or have interest in new crypto projects, that's the aim of bounty campaigns, credibility? That's on the team not signature campaign or bounty hunters

When you say credibility it means that the project is trusted, and signature campaign is only a kind of promotion. But in your question, does signature campaign increase ICO credibility my opinion is no, because credibility of a project depends on team reputation, professionalism and past experiences. If the team are trustwothy then the project is credible. On the other hand signature campaign will help you to spot the credible projects if many high ranking members joined the signature campaign, this is the sign for you to look at that project and conduct a check if project is credible .

Although it is not possible to say exactly that the signature campaigns created for new projects increase the credibility rate, it is very easy to say that they have a very serious effect on sales. Generally, project managers are very careful to use this method because they get potential investors with such advertising works and in this way they use the budget allocated for advertising effectively. In short, although it is not possible to say that such campaigns increase credibility, it is very clear that they increase the potential investor audience and sales volume.

Signature campaign is just another form of campaign, that is, just like there is Twitter and Facebook campaigns where people use their accounts to promote a project, the same can be said about signature campaign as well. So, signature campaign do not increase the credibility of ICO rather it helps to spread the project around the forum thus making it possible for potential investors to come onboard.
On the other hand, what increases ICO credibility is the idea, use case or working product of the platform, this is very important because it helps to clarify the investor if the team knows what they are doing or not. Others are, the experience of the team, the community and their partners. For a project to have good partners goes a long way to show how rooted the project is.

ICO credibility is seen from the ICO project itself, I think the signature campaign does not have a big influence in determining the credibility of an ICO. maybe some people see that if their campaign is followed by many people then the project is good, it's not always true. I used to think like that because I couldn't further analyze a project, but it was a thought when I was a newbie. In fact, what can make a good project is the development team itself, because if the team and their product or project concept are good, it will be good in the future.

Signature campaign is a campaign that is held in this forum and I think this forum is the biggest forum currently for cryptocurrency. Signature campaigns can attract many potential investors to join new projects because they are seen by many forum members and I think their effectiveness depends on the project itself, whether it is good for investment or not.

Your words need to be slightly improved, not increasing the credibility of the ICO but increasing the reach of a project to get investors. Because not all projects hold an ICO.
It's true, promoting projects on forums the size of bitcointalk is a good marketing technique.

No, signature campaign don't have anything to do with credibility of a project, signature campaign only creates and increase the rate of popularity of a project, awareness creation, that's all

You would see there are a lot of signature campaign participants so its more of promotion than anything else from my point of view. Credibility comes from the project itself and the team behind it. Signature is only there so people can checkout the project themselves and make their own decision. Does marketing help the project? of course it can help any project but only if they have other more important pieces of puzzle in place. Without them marketing won't help at all.

Things you should always look for is their payment structure. Have they paid they bounty participants on time? If not, skip investing. They are most likely a scam.

Whitepaper, Team, Management, Website, Sponsors and their values.

It actually kind of does though. If you look at the oldest signature campaigns, they all started out with a good bang of signature campaigns for a new business,,, and especially if you see the participants AND the manager are really good ones, then you know the project itself at least recognizes good people and wants to work with them.

I agree that this is often how people think that if a signature campaign is running a well-known manager, it means that the project is credible.
Unfortunately, this can often be confusing. Even the best manager is unable to guess what the project owner intends to do.
I think that no one should be suggested by who manages the campaign or that all participants receive payments on time. Everyone before investing in project or using its services, should make research about the it themselves.

the most important thing is the project itself, all projects can make their signature because that's only part of the promotion of each project. if indeed the project is feasible then many will join the promotion, only the added value for the project attracts people's attention.

I'm not quite sure if signature could really increase ICO's credibility right now we are in a Defi hype and I think soon it will end and let's hope that the ICO would soon rise again with new and legitimate projects not just a proper signature but I think good advertising strategy could really  boost the ICO's credibility.

Good ICO credibility is not from Signature campaign. There are many reason to increase credibility ICO and i think Signature campaign is one of reason to increase credibility ICO by promoting in forum.

Signature campaign is just a part of their marketing to spread the news about the project and to create awareness to the people. It is just a promotional tool and the team and project itself are liable for the  increase of ICO credibility.

It will get the attention of many investors once they are active here in forum and sees many participants joining here especially if they are new investors, the key first is to have a good marketing so it will be noticed and can add traffic on their websites and can seek prospect investors but long time investors didn't just want the marketing but about the project itself and how well they plan and proceed their projects develop. The credibility will still depends on teams customer service and product performance.

There is a misconception that if a token sale (ICO, ITO, IPO) has a signature Campaign in Bitcointalk paying in BTC that means that project is serious about the project and that project is legit and have credibility. Paying in BTC suddenly increases a project's reputation and people start thinking that they should invest in their project because if they are paying in BTC then they can't be scams.

I would say that is not the case. Scammers are very smart and scammers can invest money to gain community trust too. paying in BTC doesn't increase any ICO's credibility and should not be trusted bases on that only. There were a lot of cases in fast where projects paid in BTC and  at the end turned into scams, shut down the projects and users lost their money.

So, never judge a projects credibility by signature campaigns or their other marketing campaigns (because there is same conception about projects who promote their projects in coinmarketcap or google adsense).

That's right, Some new investor can have a misconception about altcoin campaigns that are paying bitcoin thinking that it would be safe to invest with because they believe that the project is serious enough to pay participants bitcoin or other mainstream tokens to promote their campaign. Research would be more sensible rather than basing if a project is offering a paid signature campaign.

If we are talking about giving an ICO pure credibility with just the paid signature campaign, it would be a bad choice. But if we are eyeing a project and find out that it has the potential, at the same time it offers a paid signature campaign, it will add more credibility to the project.

Project credibility will be better if the dev team is active in introducing the project and regularly provides reports regarding the progress that has been achieved. This interaction will create a good ecosystem, because the progress is clear and the products can actually be seen as beneficial.

This will be even better when the trusted forum members on this forum give good feedback. through a signature campaign, it can be an effective way, especially if handled by a trusted bounty manager and the selection is tight. but remember, this is only an alternative option.

well, the existence of a signature campaign gives the understanding that currently there is a very good program that is used by many people, especially when you use a signature campaign on an account that has a Legendary or Hero rank which in my opinion can have an influence on many people in this forum.

Yes somewhat it increase credibility, because they show that they want to present their project in a right way, but signature campaign doesn't guarantee success and it's potential in the market, signature is just for promotional the platform and the people behind the project is the one that will put credibility on the project.

Signature campaign does increase ICO, why? The goal of every advertisement placed on a goods by the manufacturer is to attract customers either organic or inorganic. You're wearing the signature of the company you're working for, a potential customer could come across your post which picks his/her interest and he/she would  decide to look up the project and make investment. Traffic and trust has been gained already through signature campaign.


That's why it is advisable by the Signature campaign managers to ensure the participants make high quality post/comments to generate attention. The project teams advertising through signature campaigns must have stopped if there is no turn out from the process.

Some time bounty signature campaign worth as promoting an ICO project and some time not get respond from investor after promote by bounty hunter with signature campaign or other campaign. Depend with how serious an ICO project how to design and make investor very interested for investing with ICO project not matter with signature promote campaign, I think when designed and give many offer for investor from bonus until how long ICO coin listed will give worth value for investor to make them interested, if an ICO project not giving any more how long promote on signature campaign is not matter and not give impact any more.

It is always depend in the project it self they need to use many kind of advertisement if they want to see it by many people and possible customer. Signature can only help them in these forum but they need to use other kind of advertisement if they want to see it by other potential buyers  and having that they need to use their own money.

There is no more ICO projects, can you promote ICO bounties if you see one now? We know what damages ICO did in crypto space, unless the project is on same level with projects like Avalanche project or high quality project only, if not no one will promote or invest on such project and to answer your question, credibility is team duty, this has nothing to do with bounty hunters, team have the power to add more credibility of decrease their credibility.

Nevertheless, projects continue to bounty companies. That being said, many of these projects are really worth your attention. Of course, we cannot talk about the safety of our funds and the funds of other people when we advertise something like that, but no one talks about guarantees. We work for those projects we believe in. Whether they succeed or not depends not only on our efforts, but also on the developers.

Signature was a part of advertisement to make awareness, however in the event that you are discussing the credibility of an ico and it absolutely relies upon the ico's reputation here, the advertisement can carry a good impression to the platforms yet this thing was exceptionally abstract since it relies upon the sincere belief after the initial introduction with the ico.

On the off chance that the team has just utilized the believed administrators to deal with its mission and afterward it could be considered as a pledge to run the project.

There's a ton of components that has assumed significant functions for this situation.

No, signature campaign is only part of their marketing strategy. It not included whether the project is credible or not. It is only to spread awareness about the project and not to increase the ICO credibility. It will always depends on the project itself, the team, the plan, and so on.

I think signature campaign does not increase ICO credibility, because signature campaign only helps promote the ICO, so that investors know about the ICO, but what determines ICO credibility is the team and the project idea of ​​the ICO, because if the team responds to investors very quickly and the idea of ​​the project is good for the future, then I believe ICO credibility will definitely increase.

Of course it will, because a new project need attention for the new investors and one of the best way to promote it is doing the airdrop or bounty campaign. Giving the token/coin allocation for bounty and airdrops is a must for new projects (except a project that is under big name company, maybe they won't need it anymore).

You should think about the problem from different angles, it may or may not be beneficial. 
However, I find that these two issues are not very related to each other, and this is not convincing with the knowledge in the market to me.

While in reality it helps yet it depend on how the management handles the campaign and how dedicated the whole team including the campaign participants in their work to make the project more successful .

I have been part of a signature campaign for almost a year now and i must admit that we really helps the progress and the popularization of this company though this is gambling site that far different in some exchange or other kind of businesses .

Of course, the team got something better than they expected based on the campaign they organized. those who are good, of course, will get a good response as well by increasing the community and market. big projects already know how this forum works and its correlation with the crypto market.

It is hardly worth agreeing that a subscription campaign increases the credibility of a specific ICO project. It's just one of the many advertising tools for this project. However, on the other hand, before joining the subscription campaign, it is in the interests of the participants of this forum to check the prospects of the project and its team. Such joining to some extent may indicate a certain trust in the project, and this can be taken into account by the guests of this forum. It's just a pity that recently, teams to promote their projects more often use advertising on social networks than subscription campaigns.

In my opinion, yes, because some investors come from the bitcointalk forum, the more people who use the signature of a project, the more people will look at the project. but even so, it is not a guarantee that the project will be successful and can provide many benefits

How can projects check how signature campaign impact on ICO or on a project in general? There are not ref links in signatures. Users can be redirected to projects webpage directly from the topic, just by randomly opening ANN an clicking on a link, and not from clicking on other users signature or from first pages of unread posts.

Previously it was a must or advised to have an ANN topic here. Now rare projects that runs bounty creates an ANN here. I can even say that due to rising amount of scam, projects avoid creating topics here. In other words, only limited audience sees signature and in my opinion signature does not affect ICO credibility at all.

Signature campaign is just like social media campaign because it also attract investors who are using this forum to find a possible potential project. Also, signature campaign help as well to create possibility of getting and attracting good amount of investors.

true as you said, because the signature campaign is a form of promotion for crypto developers to be able to attract someone to participate in their sale and we all know that this forum is the largest crypto forum in existence, so it can be ascertained if people or investors crypto must have a bitcointalk forum account as their means of getting the latest information about the crypto world, although the reach of the signature campaign promotion is not as wide as social media such as twitter, but of course it gives positive value to the ICO project.

Actually, it's a way to spread the news about the project, not everyone who wears the signature really understands the project, they just wear, do some post and make some money, that's so simple. I believe the project team understands it, they are using our big forum to run their signature campaign as they know they have a lot of potential investors here.

There's no guarantee that a project will become successful. No matter what type of marketing, it is quite helping the market to get more visible to the platforms where it is advertised.
If it's a signature campaign then it help in its own way and if it's being done in other form then it's helping the other way through a different platform. It's just another type of marketing including the bounty but not its credibility.

In a way, signature campaign does increase ICO credibility. Let me explain this, even though I know a lot of people may not see it my way. For instance, having high ranked and trusted forum members participate in signature campaigns advertising certain ICOs always make me develop interest in such ICOs. Sometimes, I have bought into ICOs because of that. I know this does not always guarantee success of an ICO but what else does? Nothing guarantees ICO success, not even knowing teams of ICO projects is enough to say the teams are genuine.

The answer is yes! The credibility of any project is not given, it must be earned! The impact of signature campaign to credibility of any project can not be over emphasized! If a project run a successful campaign, there is a big likelyhood that it will not disappoint it's investors and other stakeholders! And if a project turn out to be scam, such project will be identified quickly and be stopoed by the forum through it's users to prevent others from fallen into such scam!

I do not think investors come to bitcointalk forum at all. So I do not think it actually matters for project private sale. But a project is promoted by a high-ranking member in the forum means it's potentially good for the future. A senior member in this forum is far more experienced in crypto projects than most of the investors in those social media who are investing blindly.

- Agree, a lot of people participating in the signature campaign and don't understand the true nature of the project and some of the punishments and failures of the past have become lessons for them, the current situation has improved markedly, they not only participated without the knowledge as in the past, they are engaged by reading about the project more to avoid wasting time. Projects with signature campaigns and quality number of participants are making these projects more reputable, perhaps they are not completely successful but the classification between good and bad is very clear for potential investors to choose projects

ICO's popularity is over, yes you are right, mostly it's gambling sites who are promoting a signature campaign, that is because they believe that they will be able to spread awareness in the forum if they'll hire people to promote their site, we have millions of members so it's a big market although not all of that is active.

I can still see some ICO having a signature campaign, but actually, I have not seen a lot of successful ICO projects now.

Airdrops and bounty campaigns are one of the quick and precise ways to promote new projects by investors, and this is a must for investors, the results to be achieved are also comparable to what they promote.

Of course, I believe many investors are coming from this forum if they know that the project is worth of investment. Crypto users are come from this forum and most of them are very good at it. This forum provides the investors a lot of good or bad feedbacks about the project. If the investors know that the forum users provide good review, I’m sure that a lot of investors will come to the projects. So releasing ICO or making signature campaign helps project awareness and can gather a lot of potential investors.

Signature campaign increases the exposure about the project but they never considered to be a factor to investable, 99% of the projects with the signature campaign went to zero or scam so we should never assume that a project is good just because they run a bounty campaign. I am not sure OP talking about which project since I never found any good project from the ICO even when they collected in millions.

The sad truth is that the projects that are really hyped and that everybody wants to invest in don't really need a signature bounty anymore because their pre-sales or public sales are already oversubscribed. That's also a reason why it is so hard to find a good altcoin bounty that is really worth the effort. But from time to time there are still good altcoin bounties to take part in. Last year i was part of the radix bounty and i am pretty happy with that decision, the bounty tokens are still locked until november but given the current price of radix that bounty was more lucrative than any BTC paying bounty that is running at the moment for my rank.

Personally I always participate in different signature campaigns of projects that were recommended to me by bloggers that track all new ICOs, IDOs and airdrops. And I can say that even good projects organise signature campaigns, as it is a good marketing ploy to make more people aware of your project.

But before investing you definitely should  investigate the idea, docs and development team.

In addition the the credibility of manager handling the signature campaign which also ensure trust of that particular project, we have trusted and experienced manager who will accept the job of promoting credible projects whose promoting and awareness will be well handled and investors will have confidence in that particular project. Signature campaigns has significant impact in many previous ICOs that is why it has has been sustained for many years now, a lot of ICOs and gambling sites received a massive awareness vis signature or bounty campaigns especially project with ANN thread where investors can ask questions from their developers.

In the world of advertising and promotion, it is called visibility. Visibility is why athletes get paid to wear sponsor shirts. So Bitcointalk members increase the 'visibility' of a project by wearing its signature

Signature campaign is one of the promotions and I think the signature campaign only slightly increases the credibility of the ICO. A project that is more important in increasing the credibility of the ICO is promotion outside the forum and having big partners

That's right, I think signature promotion also helps to increase stability and legitimacy between the investors. Even some of us also support them because they analyse properly. The last bounty project "Vulcan Forged PYR" was well successful. It's my view, recently I see that some projects are pure and legit those projects are ready to launch signature campaigns.

Signature campaign (through bounties) is one of the most effective ways for small and medium sized projects to get some exposure. Most of the potential investors for the new ICO projects may be the ones who either have account in this forum, or visit the forum topics with a guest login. So a signature campaign, if executed effectively can attract at least some potential investors to the ICO project. Another advantage is that unlike other promotional campaigns, the promoters don't need to spend their money early on. They need to pay the bounty hunters only if the project is successful.

you may have misunderstood what the OP meant.
This is related to the signature campaign carried out by the ICO project to attract their success. does not necessarily select a project that is good or not good.

some of the new projects that are already registered or that have just made an ICO sale usually do signature campaigns and others to grow the community as well as grow their early investors.
however, bounty hunters are also part of the investor community of the ICO project. although with fairly small asset ownership.

we know cryptocurrency has not been adopted by everyone, and through this forum we can find a bitcoiner community so that it will be more effective to offer projects here. On the other hand, I think every project has a marketing fee to introduce its product, and the bounty campaign is the right place for that, so the project will pay the bounty hunter according to the initial budget that was planned.

This is the forum where most investors in crypto are also lurking, this isn't just for Bitcoin but even the Ether investors are here also so its signature campaign here in the forum is worth doing because the signatures are seen by potential investors who will provide funds. The ICO however isn't a trend anymore because of scammers.

This is why a team has to have someone backing them otherwise the campaign or the ICO will be a failure.

I hardly doubt you are a newbie, and signature campaign is way of advertisement and has nothing to do with credibility, that is something a person or company earned through gaining trust of other people as a result of your honesty or transparency, organising a Signature campaign perhaps can give a little portion of credibility if the project can stick to their payment process, rules and regulations, but it doesn't give the project a complete credibility, there is much to earning that.

Signature campaign can improve the exposure of that particular ICO project. If those users carrying the signature posts in popular sections, then you can expect to receive a good number of hits. But remember that it can't be compared to the full-fledged advertisements. There is a size-limit on the signatures and you can't include graphics and all. But I don't understand why the OP has mentioned credibility here. If a trusted user is displaying signature from a particular project, I don't think that it will give that project any additional credibility.

The problem is ICO is not anymore a good investment, even if you hire the most popular and the best poster in the forum, the rate of ICO to be successful is still very low, the main reason is that the crowd sale platform has already evolved, people are looking for a safer form of crowd funding.

Some ICOs still rely heavily on mere words, a makeshift design to raise funding as before has completely failed. The birth of Ido/ILo is reflecting quite well the liquidity problem, a beta product or testnet must be ready. Jax network is one such project. Signature campaigns are just a form of marketing, promoting visuals and clicks. It is not a criterion to consider the level of trust for a project.
Have you heard of keyword-based advertising that shows up in search? Signature is also a similar form, but the result shows a visual image.

Signature campaign is one of the sign that the project really have a serious plan behind because they want to pay the bounty manager to manage the bounty. The better the manager means the project really want to pay more to promote their project and i think it's one of the sign that the project team want the project reach a successful in the future.

Most crypto investors are here so the signature campaign has a huge impact on the development of an ICO. It's been the best way to advertise a certain token. Promotions like this is necessary for the growth of an ICO so most investors would be able to see its potential.

i am thinking there is no correlation with project seriousness and signature campaign . Most bounty campaign have allocation for signature and it didn't represent about project quality. except if this campaign using major coins as reward, such as bitcon or usdt that be common currency to pay bounty hunter.

it is be one of marketing campaign to promote project in this forum , alot investors in this forum and some of them also be bounty hunter. so using signature campaign was good strategy to get internal member as target promotion.

at least for a good project definitely get investors from this forum.
the signature campaign will probably only promote the ICO project to people around the forum who will mostly understand how a good project is or not.
Don't be wider, it's actually on social media with some unique content creators.
but this forum actually has a lot of big investors.

One of the main roles of a signature campaign is to convey the identity of a project to the people. In this case, people may have positive thoughts about the project, investors may increase but it is difficult to say that ICO creativity will increase. However, the social media campaigns are ICO Increases reputation.

- The performance of the projects as well as their seriousness cannot be judged by the signature campaign, maybe a good bitcoin signature campaign will carve a few more impressions and help people remember the name of the project but quite a few projects do so, projects that just know how to open their grand opening with their token and remind of ICO now, it's still a dreaded specter. Specifically, the signature campaign does not play a hero that can increase the credibility of the ICO, only the creators are the heroes who save their children.

Although it may have an impact for the project to be know by somebody here in this forum, but the real credibility is the potential of the project if it has a good development in the future. Signature campaign could also give good impact such that if several people wears the project's signature, they would be curious in some reasons to know the new project, however good ico should have a good vision and roadmap of it's own project. Also the campaign manager could give a good impact credibility if the manager is trusted and diligent with his or her works.

Signature campaign is one part of the marketing campaign. Actually, it makes more people aware of their project, but I don't think that it is a factor that you should be guided by. There are a lot of projects who use Signature campaign to promote themselves, but they are still scammers so you should investigate documents, development team and partners first of all. 

Not necessarily, and it can be guaranteed. This is just a promotional way to expand information and multiply investors, especially those in this forum. The concept and team of the ICO project becomes more important behind the existing project. In addition, the factors of the manager in this case also make credibility more increased.

I guess it helps on promoting ICOs or IDOs. Because campaign manager won’t use signature campaign if it doesn’t help the project to increase or attract more investors. Though, social media platforms where the most common tools in promoting a project because it connects to people easily. Since social media were already part of people’s daily lives.

Not really to be honest.

There are a lot of sig campaign for absolute garbage ICOs that have ended up going bust.

There are a few good ones as well though, don't get me wrong. For instance Enjincoin or Antshares (NEO now). But that is the exception, not the rule. You are just as likely to find good projects looking through Coinmarketcap and picking some random coin.

I think they have done more and more to their marketing strategy by way of promoting through signatures. I think about the credibility of a project it's the same as having nothing to do with the type of signature campaign. because the credibility of a project really depends on the team and the project developer itself, what determines credibility is the team, not the type of campaign

Signature campaign has nothing to do with the credibility of a project, this type of signature campaign can only do promotion of the project so many investors will look at the project and see if they want to join or not in investing here, they can generate awareness and that's all they can do do, what matters most is the team that will determine the credibility of their project.

In my experience the presence of a signature campaign on the forum doesn't correlate with the quality of the project. A signature campaign should be viewed as an advertisement for a project and not otherwise it's worth understanding that some projects don't need such advertising at all and this is normal.

yep. wearing avatar on this site is good to attract investor, and the other class.
yeah.
more and more people use A avatar is good, but doesnt mean the project is good. they have different place, between attraction and good project. like two different team, for their popularity, the other for good project.
doesn't mean that if many people join this project it means this project is good

@OP i think yes but not many projects will get big benefit for signature campaign.
because the member of this forum usually has many experience to see which project is good to invest and which is not.
sometimes if i am interested about some project in this forum, i sell some of my crypto to buy/invest in those project i choose
 

Yes, the type of signature campaign with the quality of the project is certainly not correlated, but most projects that have good quality and success will provide a higher percentage of rewards for this type of signature campaign. In essence, investors are more interested because of the influence of the type of signature campaign. let's see, the average campaign that looks successful is that there is a signature campaign type.