Bitcoin Forum

This is an issue that should be attended to . Bounty managers should always have it that they need to assist hunters to get what their reward is. Some developers have taken from hunters what their benefits are.

There are some points that should be tackled about this...

1. Ensure that rewards are distributed before they go into exchange. This is because when the coin goes into exchange and starts performing and increase, developers find it difficult to redeem the promise. Dego bounty is an example on that.

2. Always have a good bargain protection for hunters so that no matter what, the reward will go to the hunter after the bounty.

3. Suggest payment in valuable altccoins because protection of workers should be important to any company.

I think that you are wrong if you are only mentioning the manager here. Remember the manager was getting paid to run the campaign and the team will try to deceive what will be the mechanism for the distribution of reward. So many managers have been asking to escrow the reward and the manager can do nothing when the team was refusing to escrow the reward.
It's a double-edged sword.

You know what they need to do in that case?

They need to also refuse managing such scamming project but instead they go on with it or another manager is employed to carry up the project and deceive innocent people. So is not always a double-edged sword if they carry out detailed investigation before taking up the job

The problem of non-payment for our agreed work done by the project development team has existed for a long time and so far it has not been practically resolved. Sometimes the transfer of tokens to the bounty pool manager does not even help, which as a reward should be paid to bounty hunters after the bounty campaign.
For example, the Bintex Futures team transferred their BNTX tokens to the Bounty detective manager, and after the end of the bounty changed their tokens to others and refused to send them to the manager. Therefore, the work of the bounty hunters was never rewarded.
This problem should be solved by state regulation of this type of activity.

Bounty is not a job and the bounty managers are also same like bounty hunters who stuck with such problems as long as the bounty team decided not to release the rewards for their bounty team.

Bounty managers should be responsible for this?

Definitely not, in my opinion because everyone join into the bounties knows the risks so they should be prepared for it.

There have been plenty of issues way back between bounty hunters and bounty managers and I think it is still evident up until now. Whenever a bounty hunter encounters a scam campaign, their labor results into nothing making them enraged to the bounty manager when in fact, the one they should be blaming is the whole team of the campaign. The manager is only responsible for the peace and coordination of the campaign as they serve as the neutralizer in between hunters and the campaign team. They will surely help you with your rewards if ever the campaign is not a scam but if it is, he is also troubled for sure that's why he cannot aid help for you.

Not everything and not always depends on the project manager, but, nevertheless, a lot. And managers do not always pay due attention to the performance of their duties. They are people too, and among them, there are both responsible and deserving respect, and those who think only about their own enrichment and achieve this in a far from the completely honest way. Many already know who they can trust and who cannot. Therefore, the choice depends on ourselves with whom we work.

You have spoken well and in a reality sense; i think Number 3 is quite achievable; if the bounty manager can compel the projects to choose a cheaper stable coin means of reward or a clear assurance or escrow too. The truth meanwhile is that as long as there are disclaimers on bounty threads that terms are liable to be changed at any time; i think there is little hunters can do

This issue have been discussed too many times on this forum, fact is nothing can stop this issue with bounties, you are the only one to avoid joining bounties with no escrow because believe me escrow is the only way to atleast avoid not getting paid in time or at all.

Bounty Managers should protect bounty hunters, but they should protect the companies they work for as well, that is just the truth. I mean think about it, we are talking about a person who gets paid by the companies and you are expecting them to protect the hunters first? That is not going to happen, they will always keep the companies happy and cheering for them so that they would get good references and make a lot more profit that way, if you keep both hunters and companies happy that would be even better.

I personally like a few people in here, brainboss, hhampuz all those people are great at what they do, but they didn't became great by just declining what companies request and only listening to hunters, they became great by finding more and more companies to keep them happy and eventually reach to a level where all companies know them and can trust them.

Let's say when there's a legit project that asked the manager to manage its bounty and does the manager need to reject it? A project like persistance, apeswap will never try to destroy its reputation.
I know how do you feel about that but their money their rules.
The hunters just need to DYOR before try to join in any campaign. The managers were always doing the research before trying to manage the campaign.

We are like betting on time.
there is no black and white agreement that we can ask for direct justice if the project cannot be paid off as the hunters expect
only with complaints that we can do and depending on the conscience of the manager himself who can realize the prize according to the rules..

I think it is about time you don't call these users promoting your project mere bounty hunters. They are not really bounty hunters in this current setup. They're promoters, media influencers, video creators, article writers, translators, etc. In other words, they are all marketers and workers of your projects. In this way, they should be treated accordingly. They should not just be treated as useless workers.

Managers are oftentimes just looking after their own payment and don't care about the participants of the campaigns. Most often participants are just treated poorly as if they don't matter at all.

This is recurring issues by the bounty hunters and bounty manager on threads and in fact I also experience this kind of problem,yet still there's no solution on this matter. Only thing we can do is just hope to be paid or leave it and charge to experience.

Since past i never complained although sometimes get same experience too. But i think bounty manager will do their best to do their job because it will affect on their reputation. About distribution, usually it is from developer's team and i believe bounty manager wouldn't only silent and keep to follow up the team about distribution. If me, as bounty hunters when see the project is not good like to hold the payment, just talk in forum. Then their investor will know what actually happen to the project and market will decide whether the project success or not because of it.

Escrow is really needed in this part of crypto space but new crypto teams know what they are doing by saying they don't want escrow, they don't like the idea of making bounty hunters rich when their tokens pump, instead of giving out tokens that they can really afford they promised to give out high tokens allocation for attraction sake

Agreed, the basic thing should be their money their rules. The manager can try to create the best deal with the team about the rules for the payment but the decision will be on the team itself whether they agreed with the agreement that already offered by the manager.
I see that so many managers getting accused by the hunters about the payment. Escrow is a must but the team didn't wanna take this solution.

the bounty manager can't do all that. even if from the beginning the project team had promised to do it, but it's normal in the end they deny it. There are many cases like this and the manager's bounty is to blame. what should be needed is an escrow holding the bounty allocation. can be from bounty managers or third parties who are of reasonable value and will not commit fraud. escrow can help bounty participants get rewards. and the best way for now.

 I dont think they will agree on this part. As the bounty project always pay the rewards with their own coin and distribution will be done after the launch and exchange listing.
 
 The manager is the one who manage the campaign and distribute the rewards. Its because the manager is the one who monitors and know who are the qualified participants to be paid off. As for me, the manager is the wheel of the project. If that gains good reputation and had a good experience handling such projects, there will be assurance that the reward will surely been given off to the participants.

Too often bounty participants will become victims of fraud when a project built from scratch has become large and the project seems to forget the bounty participants who they think are useless junk, even a trusted bounty manager can also become victims and damage their reputation, there are It's good to choose a bounty that has been verified by the bounty manager that the project has really given a token to the manager for assurance during the distribution period.

Only a few serious teams will make escrow and the manager's job is simpler than ever but too little, most other projects only negotiate one contract for postpay, tokens will remain in the team's wallet and they will only be distributed when the bounty manager completes the spreadsheet in detail and accuracy. The easy operation is based on such principles, the managers do not directly run the project, instead of asking them to help us succeed, we should respect and work together, failures or successes, both parts are shared with each other

Bounty managers must conduct the company well and ensure that the participants comply with the conditions set forth. The participants do not have any contract with the company, so no one formally owes us anything and we do not owe anyone anything. We were offered a reward for fulfilling the conditions, we agreed, or did not agree. It's all in words.

in my opinion the manager is only in charge of supervising whoever joins a bounty,
and for payments that are given back to a team that has funds for a bounty,
the manager is only a bridge for bounty hunters to get a reward,

Question , is signature campaign a job? If it is not as your answer, but signature participants get weekly payments in bitcoin.

So why will bounty managers not be responsible to suggest reward in valuable altccoins and also escrow it  ::)

Maybe you missed the point of escrow service. Some don't get success even with escrow service. The last project was Dego Finance. We have so many names before these projects. VIDY and XDB also did the same scam as Dego. Still, I can remember the "inscoin" problem later delisted from the Binance exchange after the last bullran over. Maybe Dego could be delisted from the Binance exchange.

I think now bounty manager should take bounty payment from team first then start bounty so that bounty manager can give us bounty payment.

In my opinion, when it comes to the distribution of coins, it is only handled by the Team, not by the bounty manager, because the prize manager will hand everything over to the team when the project he manages is completed. as for the price then it is a game on the market, if many sell it after distribution, it is only natural that the price of the coin will experience a low price and vice versa

There are some reputed bounty managers who are aware of the rights of bounty hunters like CryptopreneurBrainboss but most bounty managers understand only themselves. Even when a bounty is finished, some bounty manager locks up bounty telegram. I left out the projects that fail. Why those which are successful are not paid.  However, most bounty managers promise in their bounty threads that payment will be made within 30 days of the end of the bounty. Why they promise so?

This is true, developers are really something else lately, they no longer like paying what was agreed at the start of bounty campaigns, instead they look for a way not to pay the bounty hunters, but for DEGO at the start distribution was promised but along the line they said users will have to claim the token on their platform and they gave a deadline for the bounty tokens to be redeemed, but with eth gas fees insanely high at that time many bounty hunters were unable to withdraw from their platform and now it seems there won't be any payment any longer, no matter what the bounty manager does, there will still be some greedy dev who wouldn't like to pay bounty after the bounty, I don't think there's much we can do to change that.

You are correct in your post dude, but we cannot deny the fact that there are some BM who are not responsible in the welfare of others, we all know that bounty manager has a safe haven position that sometimes they get the payment 50/50 before and after the campaign, and of course they get paid no matter what happen in the project, and the most tragic situation is, if the project never hit their goal the bounty hunters will affected and never get the reward.

manager didnt responsible to bounty payment , but they have responsibility to make sure all bounty reward paid. i am agree they are as bridge between us and developer team , so they must have good communication and bargaining so dev team will not arbitrarily to us.

Two things every bounty hunters should look at on a campaign, who manages the campaign, and if there is an escrow, a good manager always see to it that workers get paid in time and in full, his credibility and feedbacks coming from bounty hunters are the ones that will build his reputation, escrow is a guaranty that the bounty hunters can work without thinking that they will not get paid and they are motivated to promote the project.

There are only two types of Bounty Managers here in the forum, the good and the bad one, what do I mean for this?
there are some managers who manage the campaign projects asking for the Owner or team to use escrows to make sure the
payment will be give to all the participants who will partake in the campaign, but sometimes the dev. or team are avoiding this where
the Bounty managers sometimes can't do nothing but to accept the projects even without the escrows due to He also needs money, then
the bad one sometimes they cheat the participants to steal the rewards, in short, He took advantage His position to do this via removing the
participants without any reason, but I'm not saying all Managers doing this thing just thought and assessment only based on my observation.

A responsible bounty manager should always ensure that tokens are escrowed if possible and response with quick feedback on whatever issues raised by any hunter on their telegram handle, of course there are good BM who posses those qualities mentioned, moreso before distribution of tokens BM should always ensure that all deserving hunters receives their tokens appropriately before listing in an exchange, I read a post of hunter not duly informed on the change of token address thus lost the opportunity earning of his rewards

Everything you say I agree, because good Bounty Managers must ensure that bounty hunters get rewards. One of them is by requiring the project
owner to use escrows, and if the project owner refuses it should be good Bounty Managers refuse to promote the project. But in fact there are still
many Bounty Managers who always follow the wishes of project owners, because all they care about is that their fees as Bounty Managers have
been paid. Hopefully more and more Bounty Managers in this forum will think about the fate of bounty hunters.

You can say that responsible bounty manager ought to escrow the bounty reward because some nounty manager was indeed naive about their job but if you ask every bounty manager they will tell you that it not a easy task and some project owner also scam them at some point so it not totally their fault in some area.

Correct me if I'm wrong but is there a way to multi-send ERC20 tokens like what are they doing with Bitcoin.
Sometimes it is the problem why reward distribution is being delayed or worst, the team doesn't really want to pay these hunters and the manager is the one who is blamed with.

So you're saying like an assurance that the hunters will get their reward no matter what?
I don't think so and that is risk of joining in a bounty campaign. You will either be paid or not and there is nothing we can do about it or maybe if the campaign is being managed by these highly reputable campaign managers.

Bounty campaign has been here and there are only few campaigns that are paying their hunters in valuable or at least altcoins that already has a value and exchangeable. Most of them are just giving their native token which doesn't have any value at the start and that is the risk of it. I don't think that this will happen because owner of the project will not risk their own money just to pay these hunters and that is the sad truth.

---

Overall, there are some managers who really are paying these hunters but there are some who are just thinking of themselves being paid and nothing more. You have 2 choices as a bounty hunter, either accept it or stop/leave it :).

It will tarnish their image if they are reported not helping qualified bounty hunters to receive their rewards, I have seen many bounty managers losing their reputation and their job because of too many complaints coming from bounty hunters, the community will tagged this manager while the developer of the project will also have a scam report, the bounty manager must use an escrow to guaranty that bounty hunters will get their shares.

what about escrow, isn't this method enough to ensure the reward of the bounty participants is paid. There must be a third party overseeing this, the project team must send the campaign rewards to the escrow before the campaign starts. and after the campaign ends, escrow sends it to the prize manager or directly to the bounty participants. but the problem is the difficulty of finding parties or people who have the competence to become escrow and have a guarantee not to commit fraud.