Bitcoin Forum

I was wondering what you think of this: When you see someone making a signature campaign thread, usually the manager or the person in charge, they require that you meet a certain criteria and so on, which is reasonable. However, isn't it not fair that they ask people to wear a signature campaign while they are thinking about thinking about getting the person accepted? They are basically asking for free advertisement.

If you ask a bunch of people to wear your signature while they are looking for the right applications, during this time, which sometimes takes up to a week, there's all this people hoping to get accepted, so that's this bunch of people "working for free".

Im not saying there should be a rule where this is forbidden, but this is clearly unreasonable. One should wear the signature when you are accepted, not before. Just my opinion.

I have not seen a manager ask users to wear a signature while applying, it is usually the applicants that wear it thinking it will increase their chances of getting accepted.

I even see some managers urge the participants to take off the signature whenever the campaign is paused so no one gets free advertisement.

- Jay -

I don’t think it should be a prerequisite for applicants to wear the signature before they are accepted into a campaign — I saw it in “Jokerbet.biz” signature thread and also  famososMuertos (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5528360.msg65012266#msg65012266) pointed out the rules although they’ve been no response from the campaign manager so we don’t know if there are going to change it or not — for now it would be best to take it as a rookie mistake and wait for a response from them.

Edit:

@un_rank, it was a newbie who launched a campaign that included it in his rules - I have linked the thread in my post.

They do actually, i have seen two or more campaign managers request that applicants must wear the signatures and avatar before applying but it doesn't mean anything since users can still remove the advertising codes and avatar when they are not accepted. Besides, they are not going to wear it for too long before the manager accepts participants. The only time when it becomes a problem is in a case where a user who is in a current campaign wants to apply to another and it requires that they wear the advertising signatures and avatar before applying.

There is no place where it is written that it is mandatory to wear a signature for one to be accepted in the campaign by the manager. It is a matter of choice and most people do it and there are others who don't and are still accepted in to the signature campaign. In fact, you usually see that when members are accepted into a campaign the managers will tell them to update their signature and avatar.

Not sure if they ask people to wear a paid signature campaign for free (or maybe i'm not just aware of it ) but i'm sure there are volunteer campaigns which are not paid sig. campaigns, remembered i used to wear peach before i got accepted to a paid signature campaign,there are others as well.
Besides, they always make it clear that it's free, so it not by force but choice...
Hence, i think some users wear signature campaigns without been accepted just to show how serious they are but that doesn't count , the user is just advertising for free and it's all on the user.
Have you seen or experience any??

Tbh I haven't came across such before ( so I don't know if some are asking or not ), but I don't think they are trying to be unfair or anything. You wearing their signature before selection is by choice, just as other users said is to increase the chances of them been selected for the signature campaign.

Base on what I have seen so far sometimes when a particular campaign didn't refills their escrow the campaigns managers usually wait for sometime then advice the users that they can remove the signature of the campaign, until the escrow are been refilled and some even get selected in the process by other campaigns.

You are digressing from what the OP is saying but i can put it more clearer to you. OP is basically talking about campaign managers who asks those applying in their campaign thread to wear the signatures and avatar before applying and not about those who run free campaigns in the forum. Free campaigns are voluntary, anyone can choose to wear their avatar and signature but that is literally not what OP is saying.

For those who puts on a signature and avatar when they have not yet been accepted by the manager, some of them have the believe that they can have the advantage of being accepted and some are also people that have confidence in themselves that they would be accepted despite that in the end most of those who act smart are not accepted.

I believe what you are talking about is bounty campaign which involves Altcoin payment in the Altcoin section of this forum, not signature campaigns with Bitcoin payment found in the service section of the forum.

When applying for a signature bounty in a bounty campaign, managers do ask the interested participants to wear the signature and avatar of the company before filling in their application, this is possibly because there are alot of cheaters in bounty campaigns where if the manager accept a participant while he or she is not yet wearing the required signature and avatar, they may end up not wearing  it.

This is not the same with signature campaign in the service board of this forum, managers there allow participants to apply without first wearing the signature, the participant is required to wear the signature and other materials immediately after he is she gets accepted into the campaign.

to be honest I don't see much of an issue with it, I mean, I usually wear the signature and avatar of the campaign I want to apply to(of course if there is a slot). anyway, sure it may be a "free advertisement" for them but then again they are not forcing you to apply to join their campaign, you are always free to ignore their signature campaign if one of their rules doesn't sit right with you.

I don't see this as a big issue. It is just simple. If I am out of a campaign and a new campaign is launched, while applying, I will definitely wear the signature and avatar such that if I'm accepted, I don't get to bother myself anymore.

However, if you are in a campaign already and wants to switch to a new campaign, there's no need removing your paid signature and avatar when you aren't accountable yet in the new campaign.

LOL, it's not making much sense. If this can happen and the manager doesn't notice, it means that after being accepted in the campaign, the participant can still remove signature and avatar and still gets paid.

I really don’t see this as a Meta issue. If you don’t feel comfortable doing so, you shouldn’t. It’s solely up to you but you should be able to trust the campaign manager you’re applying to. Back when Bestchange signature campaign was active and one of the biggest campaigns on the forum, their selection process often took longer than two weeks to pick a new participant to join their campaign. A lot of users didn’t seem to mind wearing the avatar and signature during this waiting period. I personally don’t mind wearing the avatar and signature of a company I intend on working with for as long as I’m not currently working in a campaign.r

That has been the statement you see but, not a factual one from the many I’ve had to observe. It took a while to understand but I did. Eventually, that rule doesn’t mandate no one to wear signature as an applicant else, a lot of users actively working a campaign would have lost opportunities and not be accepted in the next signature campaign.

That’s because, you don’t get to take off your signature at any point except, asked to by the manager or you’re out of the campaign.

Users still get accepted even without wearing a signature.

Most signature campaign managers don't do that. Let me show you the prerequisites/rules for applying for a signature campaign by a few reputable managers:

1. icopress (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1137579):


2. Little Mouse (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2344286):


3. AB de Royse777 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=366632):


4. Upgrade00 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2423488):


If you notice, none of them has it as a prerequisite for participants to wear the signature and avatar before applying; they might have it in the rules or requirements for participation, which is a different thing. And, even if a manager does ask the participants to wear them, it doesn't mean they won't accept those who didn't do so, but it's just a term added to encourage interested participants to do that beforehand.

It's wrong for any manager to ask forum users to wear their signature while applying to their campaign, I have not seen any manager around the forum asking for such conditions before and anyone you see wearing a signature while their applications are at the screening stage did wear that signature at they own will and not be mandated by the manager as the process of applications., if such rules are being implemented by the signature manager it will affect those that want to switch from the only campaign to a new only those without campaign will be able to wear and apply for the campaign with such conditions.

It's a big NO for me, I won't agree such rules, so i will just ignore the thread. It does not make sense especially those who still in the campaign who wants to apply.

I guess some bounty campaign managers do this especially those who wants to exploit it as "free advertisement".

I haven't seen such a rule in at least seven years. Can you share which campaigns are in question here?
Of course, I hope you don't count some trash bounty campaigns run by some wannabe managers.

Some campaign managers might ask you to use a signature, but most don't. I don't think it's a big deal if you're not already enrolled in a campaign when you apply. After all, you join a campaign because you trust what you're promoting. So, even if you're not sure you'll get hired, wearing a signature is just following the rules and giving a bit of free advertisement. There's nothing wrong with that, and it's not unfair since it depends on the manager. What is unfair is when you promote for a whole week without pay, only for the campaign to suddenly stop.


This is a brand new campaign that just launched.

Well, I don't think there's anything wrong in applying a signature code on your profile when you aren't in a campaign already. Yes, that's some type of free advertisement but it's something good from participants side who apply to get accepted in those campaigns as it doesn't harm them in any way or doesn't cost them a dime.

It's a type of good will I believe and managers do admire such participants because they understand that such participants are active members of the forum and can be helpful to promote a service via their signature space. I also believe that something like this shouldn't be mandatory but there's no harm if someone applies a signature before getting accepted in the campaign.

It's obvious that the campaign manager is not aware of the un-written rule of most managers here. And if you look at the account, he is a newbie. Maybe the OP might want to PM the manager himself and tell him to remove it in his rule.

Or maybe invite him to  come into this thread and explain his rule, as what others might have said, it's his campaign, it's his rule.

looking around it seems like apart(though I might have missed someone) from Jokerbet.biz, Hhampuz is one of the camapaign managers that require his applicants to wear signature and avatar when applying. though I am not sure if he is strictly enforcing it, I have not been in one his campaigns in a while. anyway, I don't really see any issue with it.

here's the most recent campaigns he has where he requires his applicants to wear signature and avatar

Technically it's not fair, it's the same thing for campaign managers who require to use username or ID from the account they sign on the site they promoted. Also asking to write a review on ANN thread.

The first one is, they "working for free" to get organic traffic and the second one is, they "working for free" get review.

Yeah maybe @OP of that thread was inspired by Hhampuz, hence they use that rule too.

I have participated in few campaigns managed by Hhampuz and he still accept me even I didn't wear both signature and avatar when/before applying, although I can't answer whether it's increase the chance or not to get accepted.

True, this thread should be moved to Service Discussion board.

The fact that I have seen several members wearing a different Signature applying for a campaign countless times and get accepted tells me this whole free advertisement doesn't exist!!

But possibly if you are enrolled in a different campaign and forfeit  your other weeks works..technically that could be free advertisement,  and counter measure is wait for week to finish then get on to the other campaign  ::)


And from experience,  I have worked with over 10+ managers on the forum , all with different standards and I can say for certain that wearing a Sig isn't a prerequisite,  besides wearing a sig is one part, then posting on the forum is a duty on the user..so you can choose to wait for your application to be accepted then post to avoid this so called free advertisement, otherwise wearing a sig during the application process gives you a 25% chance of getting accepted !!

You're talking about this signature campaign, right? 🎭JokerBet.biz Signature Ad Campaign [ Accepting Applications ] (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5528360.msg65011936#msg65011936)
If you are not comfortable with the rules for applying then ignore it, because each campaign manager has their own way of marketing.
And in my opinion, the rule is stated to see the seriousness of the applicant, because usually there are members who like to move from one campaign to another and usually to get a higher payment, so by using the signature code it shows that they are serious.
However, for that signature campaign it seems that it will only get applicants who are free because the value is not high.

If all users are like this, it's not surprising we would see these kind requirement in the future.

1. User must wear avatar and signature, if you're currently in a campaign, you need to gamble to leave the present in order to join the new one.
2. Submit your CV, tell what you're good at, write good post on ANN thread and praise the manager.
3. Like, comment, and share every post in social medias.
4. User must not jump into another campaign less than 3 months, otherwise you will blacklisted for the next 3 campaigns.
5. Accepted user agree the first 100 posts will not be paid in order to know the naturally of your post.

These all ridiculous rules just for a sake of "seriousness", please distinguish between "seriousness" and "slavery".

Don't understand why you attack the word seriousness without reading the whole text. As I said at the beginning if you are not comfortable with the rules then ignore it, I mean can you change what is the company's rule to suit your wishes?, so applicants must read the rules if you don't like it then don't apply not tell the manager to change the rules, hopefully your intelligence understands that or you are an applicant who successfully makes the manager change the rules according to your wishes.

ok, I haven't been in his campaigns so far. However, I believe that he does not prioritize this condition, especially if someone applies and is already in another campaign.
I wouldn't be surprised if he just uploaded the same template with campaign conditions, so he didn't change this outdated rule.

Also, no one should be afraid to present such things publicly through constructive criticism, I am sure that a manager like Hhampuz will not put his own ego before reasonable suggestions.

Helena Yu mentioned that she had joined a few of his campaigns in the past and remembers that she applied and got accepted without wearing the signature and the avatar first, so that tells us that Hhampuzz doesn't strictly enforce the rule. That being said, Helena Yu also mentioned that she doesn't know if wearing the signature and avatar before applying increases the chance of being picked.

yeah, and I agree with that.

Why is this in Meta? Move it to Service Discussion (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=85.0).

Signature campaigns are a free market. It has nothing to do with "being fair". If you don't like the terms, ignore them.

@takuma sato it's quite simple...
ignore these types of campaigns/applications and only apply for the campaigns that you think are 'fair' and avoid in this case of 'working for free' ;)

I also do not think he enforces the rule in his campaigns when picking participants. He is one manager who does not like to give free advertisement to projects so it is expected he will not enforce such a rule.

Yes, it will help to not include it in the rules if it is not enforced.

- Jay -

From my perspective, not wrong, but not really savory either.

Just like a job application, no one in the right mind would simply list the new employer on their profile before applying for one of their jobs, while currently being employed.

Since many applicants are in some campaign, that would not look good if the current sig manager finds out.

In the end, willing buyer, willing seller. But I'd not want to apply for such.