Bitcoin Forum

Hello all,

Looking for some feedback on this particular topic. In general as a participant in bounty campaigns would you rather have one that:

1) is short in length but may provide limited opportunity to earn coins or tokens

or

2) one that drags on for longer time periods (up to a year) but give you the opportunity to earn a larger share of the total bounty fund

Let me know your thoughts and why!

Bonus: What's your most disliked type of bounty campaign?

On signature campaigns: Campaigns that are reputable and run for long periods of time, as I just want to casually contribute and converse here while earning a decent amount of bitcoin, without actually looking for other campaigns to hop to every month of every few weeks.

Those campaigns that require social media spamming.

Ultimately it comes to campaigns that pay. There have been both kinda campaigns but when they paid, it was like your work, energy, time was worth it. If I even spent a minute or an hour or a year, it doesn't matter but I need to get paid for my work.

Also, I don't like long-term campaigns that pay after a year as I cannot trust a project not paying for such a long period. Max period should be 3-4 months and updates should be given about the progress of the sale and project.

Campaigns don't escrow the funds and hence the funds should be escrowed and probably it should be an amount BTC/ETH or any other popular coin (a percent of the bounty) so if the project fails to accumulate the said funds or the project fails to launch despite collecting the soft-cap, the participants are atleast rewarded a small amount for the effort they have taken.

It depends because campaign are of two type those which pay in bitcoin and those that pay in tokens, when it comes to campaign that pay in bitcoin then I will rather go for a long term campaign that last for years and the other which is the bounty and you are paid at the end of the bounty and this usually take long time to achieve and in most cases end up as scam because there is no escrow or any agreement but if it a bitcoin campaign payments are made weekly which give you assurance.
What I dislike most is Bounty's that never pay worker's after a long period of hard work.

If the allocation is followed properly and given until the end, then no problem about that limited opportunity since exact rewards will be received.


Honestly it was also good but currently the status of bounty programs is not that good as before especially that majority of ICO's failed last year due to bearish market. Because of that, others lose interest in joining bounties now.

No one wants to waste time now because they didn't know if their effort will be paid, well there are still others who want to take the risks. Even someone will have a larger share and rewards were given properly in the end,  the question is, is it profitable or worth the effort? At most of the cases, coins ended up on a smaller exchange with small trading activity even they reached hardcap or quite raised a decent amount.

P.S My answer is basically pointing to the usual bounty programs (altcoin projects).

They all are after the sweet pot which depends upon the period (the longer they participate the bigger the share they will get). So IMO they love that but fear that they might scammed and all those works would be nothing.

You can pay them by releasing at certain time-points where you release portion of tokens as according to the work they done. This will maintain their interest going for the token reward and as well will make them feel secured to some extent.

If we would talk about Bitcoin paying campaigns, no doubt that people prefere long term campaigns which are running here for years.
I'm not bounty hunter and I never tried to participate in bounties, but I suppose that people prefer shorter campsigns. Seing huge number of scam ICO's, I think it's very risky to join long term bounties. Just imagine you're promoting project for almost year and in the end you won't get paid anything. It hurts. Offcourse, in short term campaign you also can be scammed, but your "losses" will be smaller.
And your bonus question - I hate social media campaigns. First, it's annoying to see all the reports on bounty threads (why they can use Google forms for it?). Second, I doubt that it can give much publicity to the project. Usually people are using fake Twitter/Facebook profiles with fake friends/followers for the campaigns. Or their friends/followers are just other bounty hunters who aren't interested in investing in ICO. I doubt that many potential investors see these posts on social media.

unfortunately most, if not all, bounty campaigns are paid in their own (worthless) tokens
if paid by tokens I would prefer shorter campaign, so that I can decide a.s.a.p whether to sell or hold these tokens
why bother joining longer campaign with opportunity of bigger share of bounty, when in the end most will be zero value  

aren't all bounty campaigns required standard social media, such as facebook, twitter, and instagram?
how would their project get maximum exposure without spamming social media :D ;D

Depends for me, I used to hop from campaign to campaign from time to time in the past as well and I generally prefer shorter campaigns if the pay is in some token or altcoin and longer ones if the pay is in bigger cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum. I generally don't like to hop from campaigns much anymore, would rather stay in a longer lasting campaign for stability of pay.

I don't like campaigns that aren't run by a reputable member of the forum or are non-escrowed, or ones that have a high minimum post requirement. I don't have an exceptionally great amount of time to post on this forum so campaigns that provide flexibility of post count are great for me.

Mostly as far as I know.

I mean, there are better alternatives. I'd far better prefer sponsored articles and sponsored videos on YouTube that are actually helpful and informative rather than just going straight-off to the social media spam route.

Not all project do that. In fact, they should never do that as it only causes potential investors to turn away. I think it's not effective either.

Depends on what their product is, signature campaign, content creation/translation and probably development bounty are better for them. I know two projects that instead of running a spam festival campaign, tried to engage with their community via various development and marketing bounty. By marketing, I mean connecting with potential clients directly and so on, instead of RT-ing their tweets.

In campaign of ICO, I guess members want a shorter period because there's no cash and it's boring to work at a stress without any payment.
On the other hand, if someone is in a campaign which pays BTC, they will likely to wish the campaign run long. It's a hassle to switch campaign to campaign. Better to stick with one, although pay rate matter sometimes.

The major concern of bounty participants nowadays is working months on a bounty and ends up getting paid with coins or tokens that's worth a few pennies. Notice that some long running campaigns were now abandoned. I guess hunters have learned their lessons.

I personally prefer shorter campaigns with a decent pool. But if I find a campaign that's really good, I'd be fine with a 15 week campaign (max).


Campaigns that keeps on extending.
Campaigns that runs until ICO ends but with an ICO that has no specific dates.
Campaigns that adds rules during or at the end of the bounty like KYC or some kind of exchange voting shit.

The 2nd choice would be favorable for them. As they dont have to keep on joining and enrolling different bounty from time to time. For a year they will be secured with that bounty as long as it is legit and theu will pay with a worthy token.

But the problem has been said that many bounties now that are likely to run for a long time, and at the very end of the campaign no payment will be sent.

I don't take part in bounties except my signature campaign but if I was a bounty hunter I would prefer a bounty that pays their participants in the coins they raise, or at least a part of the bounty pool. Meaning, BTC, ETH, LTC or whatever funding options are available. That would give legitimacy to the project. Unfortunately there are almost no projects that do that and that is why I don't like bounties. There are also no weekly or at least monthly payments and no guarantees participants will ever get paid.

If it were up to me I would make it a rule that parts of the bounty allocation has to be escrowed in BTC/ETH as a guarantee that bounty participants will get paid.

That depends on the reward, if the reward is not big enough then of course I would prefer for a short term.
Long term campaign will gain a lot of participants overtime, hence that will result to a decrease of stakes or reward.
Further, there's a lot of opportunity in the market, so it's good if we can also participate on other project.

1 month bounty is already good for me, some smart bounty hunters are really clever, the moment they sees the project is getting better, they then joined even in the last week, and these people are high rank so this will result to a significant decrease of reward.

In signature campaign, bounty, those who have higher ranks will enjoy the benefit, as they do the same job with the low rank, but they earn better stakes.

Campaigns that stretches for longer periods are preferable unless the payment will be made by the time the campaign ends. The reputation of the campaign or its manager also helps. If the payment will be made in tokens, ETH or any other coin asides from BTC, then I'd probably prefer a shorter campaign.

What I don't like about a campaign is when it requires a ridiculous amount of posts/has no limit/promotes spamming or even when they allow spam posters to participate. Those who spam should not be given the opportunity to earn from it, it's like paying someone to trash a place.

it's hard to say basing just on the length. Most campaigns pay only at the end of them so entering a long one (which I prefer, taking all other factors into account) gives you higher risk of not being paid or significant reduction of your payout, as with time long campaigns tend to get more and more participants. My ideal campaign would be a) run by a very reputable manager, b) with limited number of participants and c) 1-3 months in length.

Long bounty campaign is boring for me, so I don't enjoy it.
As a bounty hunter, if we were given a chance to choose between a long and short period bounty campaign, we will surely
choose a short term so we can sell our reward and enjoy it right away.

As a bounty manager one of my criteria for accepting future bounty campaigns to manage will be, they have to be short term campaigns and if the project intend hiring me for longer campaign period then it'll be carried out in batches (payment to be made after completion of each batch maximum 2-3months for each batch). I don't fancy long campaigns beside in the Altcoin market, hype plays a roll in the success of your project (that's just facts) so if you're to give a reason to the bounty participants (convincing them) into investing in your project, capitalizing on the hype opportunity and treating the bounty participants right by paying them on time will go a long way.  That's the advantages of short term campaigns, longer campaign will get them frustrated which will lead to selling your tokens the moment they can laid their hands on it.

Learned from what happened with those previous long term projects, most of them turned to a scam or not being listed from the exchange,
so if giving a chance it's much better to join in a short term campaigns so you can see the results right away and move to another after.

There have been a lot of successful "long" running funding rounds.  Even though I don't like EOS, they raised billions of dollars over a year.  That is very long compared to these other projects that are only running initial investment for a couple of months. 

How long or short a bounty campaign is, is not what bounty participants enjoy, for what they enjoy is the team treating them like a human and co-worker. Besides, they like the team to keep their own side of the bargain in terms of making payment in time with keeping to the rules and regulation consider no KYC issue.

Depend upon your time, if you are going to be busy in next month or so, you will like to take part in short campaign.


If you are paying weekly in some liquid coin and token then people will love to do long campaigns otherwise it is waste of year.


Bounty campaigns distributing their worthless token in name of bounty.

I am a bounty hunters but I enjoy short campaigns more than long ones. There are some campaigns that turn out to be scam or do not reach their soft cap. Imagine if you participated in a campaign like this, you have wasted a lot of time and resources.

Bounty participants enjoy longer campaigns only if the bounty is big. But if the bounty is small then most probably bounty hunters wanted it as a short term campaign.

Although we have signature campaigns. For these signature campaigns, participants wanted it to lasts because it's a weekly payment and you know that these campaigns are paying.

I don't like bounty campaign combining their bounty thread with their announcement thread. Their announcements are being spammed by the social media participants.

Just report them to moderators if you happen to find something like that. There is a whole section dedicated for bounty threads to be posted and yet they are doing something like this in order to get some bumps.

You spoke my mind. I hate the fact that the teams treat the participants as some beggars begging for money when infact we are working in their promotional campaign. They just ban users from their telegram groups who complain about a valid issue and don't even answer them via a personal message. Even if the team is working positively towards their project, such rudeness shows they can't be trusted for long.

Depends, i'm enjoying the shorter campaigns once especially if the payment type is the coin/token which belongs to their project. Otherwise, if the payment is an established coin such as BTC/ETH and we received it weekly like a signature campaings on sub-board services (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=52.0) i prefer a long-term campaigns

A campaigns which require a weekly report on their threads instead of using a handy report forms like google form

I understand that short-term companies are preferable. But, the number of participants also significantly affects the amount of remuneration. Or does it depend on the type of payment?

if you're talking the campaigns which using 'percentage' instead of fixed rate, sure the number of participants will gives an affect of how much bounty participants will receive.
Type of payments also included on the factor since most of campaign that using BTC always give a fixed rate payments while the other is based on stakes which bounty participants earned during campaigns

Most campaigns will pay based on stakes, which are a share of the total pool of allocated tokens for the campaign (/concept). At the end of the campaign, stakes are normally calculated by adding all the awarded stakes and calculating their token equivalent as a ratio to the campaign token pool. Therefore, the more people that participate, the less amount of tokens you will receive (many do not even put a limit to the amount of participants). Additionally, since the campaign pool tends to be a fixed amount, the longer the campaign, the less tokens you will get for your shares.

Not all campaigns function by the above criteria. BTC based campaigns for example tend to pay a fixed amount per post, establishing an upper limit to the amount of posts that are considered in the payment procedure. These campaigns tend to delimit the number (and quality) of participants according to budget and other factors.

I think it differs from person to person as some people want shorter campaigns but the reward given is almost the same as the longer campaigns which shorter campaigns may/might happen to give much higher or the same reward as the longer campaign or not as the reward you'll get from campaigns whether short or long is based on the campaign itself on how successful the campaign is.

You are absolutely right it depends on individuals while some participants want I short term campaign others preferred the long term one it depends on users preference but for me personally if I like the project I don't mind promoting them for a long time as far as the payment is OK I don't mind.

It's a problem now because we don't know if the project is quality or not after it's listed in an exchange.
If the price will dump, people will think it's not a quality project, sad to say but people judge the project easily based on it's early performance.

Long bounties are bs and they take advantage. Hell some go on for a year. If you do not get paid after a year of work you going to be fuming and probably want to punch your screen in. Its unacceptable.
Bounties must split their campaign into 2 months long at the most and pay within 2 months afterwards and try get listed on the exchange. Many times you wait months to be paid or get paid and then wait months for the token/coin to be listed on the exchange.

If you are talking about bounties which is paying their own coins for the participation then longer format of the campaign increase the rick for the participants because they will get profits only of that project's coin or token get some value or else they just wasted all their time on that project.But bitcoin paying signature campaign means you have to choose long form even if the reward is less for now because later those small rewards will turn into big amount.

Whenever I join a bounty, I look into there background, such as members, business partners, and investors.

So, even if the price of tokens falls in the short term, or the distribution of tokens is significantly delayed,
I can be convinced to some extent,then I may make use of this experiment next time.

Still, i often make a mistake in choosing bounty project... ::)

Lower ranks do enjoy long terms this because the earlier they get into the campaign then the better rewards.a.user will get. But still it will depend on the rank because the higher the rank that a user will be joining in the signature bounty campaign then tue higher stakes allocated for them. This is why many are asking to get awarded by merits in order for. them to.earn in signature bounty campaign after getting some.merits and then ranking up later on.

Actually I never seen any bounties asking for merit requirement to join on their bounties.They are just concentrate on the quantity of their participants not that quality posts which are useful for the community.But as a memebr of this forum we have to avoid spams and start helping the other people as much as can in the way we are.

It’s not that widely extended yet as a requirement, and it is mostly the BTC paying campaigns that control the quality of the posts made by its participants, tending to establish a minimum amount of earned merits to begin with (see  Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns [Last update: 05-May-2019] (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=615953.0)): Around 6 or 7 of these campaigns require x amount of earned merits explicitly, whilst others don’t, but do consider them inherently as part of their cherry-picking participant selection process.

In general terms unfortunately, token paying ICOs are not concerned with quality but rather more with exposure exclusively, and thus do not (yet) demand earned merits for its participants.

I look at the overall picture of their project, is it possible or attainable, what would be the probable outcome after a length of time, if I see that there is a possibility for the project to survive and will be in great use or need in the future then possibly I would wait as their roadmaps shows their step by step plans but there are also projects that are good for short term holding, just like going with the flow and do as majority does or else you will regret if you dont. There was one bounty campaign I joined a year and a half ago which I still keep their tokens until now and at last project developments are giving hope to the value of their tokens as they give updates from time to time.

I missed this. I saw a lot of bounties last years that have this kind of scheme but I don't think right now they have this thing.

True, as long as the project is true it is worth it.

It really depends.
People actually prefer a campaign stays longer if;
- The coins being paid have value e.g BTC,ETH and not just some tokens that are not yet even on exchanges
- Payment is done weekly
- The Campaign manager is good and reputable like @Hhampuz
- The funds for the campaign are held in an escrow

Members prefer the campaign takes a shorter time if;
- Funds are not in escrow
- payment is done at the end of the campaign.
- Payment is made in tokens that have not even started trading

If campaign is paid in BTC,ETH or some non violent stable coin, and payments are rugular ( for example once a week) I don't have any problem with that campaign is long/very long. Problem starts when campaign is a lottery and you don't know how much you'll earn so these campaign should be quick for me like 4-8 weeks max

I think most of the participants definitely don't want a bounty program to take too long. There are too many ICOs cheating in the crypto world, resulting in a number of fake bounty programs designed to attract investment and gain illicit profits.

Therefore, a bounty program should not be too long, only 1 to 2 months is best. Participants do not want to spend too much effort and in the end what they get is nothing, wasting time.

Besides, the pool for bounty is also very important, if too little, no one will join it, if too much, it may be a scam. Reasonable numbers will range from 200 - 400k usd.

Actually, the USD figures that ICOs place in their bounties are merely a commercial stunt to try to attract people to their ICO and to promote it via campaign signatures and social tasks. ICOs tend to pay in their own token (except for few select BTC paying campaigns), token that still has to raise a certain value during the ICO sale, reach some sort of exchange, and then get assigned a market value. Whatever figure they place here as an equivalent in USD is just wishful thinking at best, and knowingly deceiving if not.

I beg to differ unless if you're referring to scam bounty then I don't but for those legit ones the USD tagged to the amount of coins they allocated to bounty hunters is usually based on their ICO sale price. Example if the ICO price was $0.01 and they allocated 10million token for bounty which is $10,000 in USD then it isn't deceiving since if they were to include those token in the ico it would have given them $10,000 from sales of all the tokens.

well done for the summary you have made, i do agree with your post. If OP are going to make any bounty campaign, hope he will considering this post with an additional don't make a weekly report on thread if there will be any social media campaign

Case scenarios that typically take place (scams set aside):

a) Bounty tokens are sometimes locked for x days/months after ICO sale. By the time these tokens are unlocked, ICO token value often is way lower than at ICO sale, and therefore the tokens given to the bounty hunters have less value than that stated during the bounty campaign.

b) Bounty tokens are released after the ICO sale. It is quite usual to see a dump sell on second grade exchanges really quickly after ICO sale/bounty token release, rendering the tokens a fraction of the ICO sale value, thus the tokens again do not have the values stated in the USD equivalent allocation.

c) Bounty tokens do not reach the exchanges at all, rendering the bounty tokens nearly worthless.

Of course historically there are cases that have risen in value with a tail wind, but unfortunately 2018 proved rather the opposite. What I mean by this is that the USD equivalent allocated token amount should not be taken verbatim, since it is specifically valued at token sale value, which is achieved by the ICO itself, but that is not that easy to be achieved by discrete token sellers on the market after the sale.

Long campaigns with great reputation and manager is always better since you know that they will pay you
unlike shorter campaign that just opened. I speaking from experience that there are short campaigns that
won't pay that won't pay but that is very rare. I've in a lot of short campaign back in the 2016 most of them
are great but joining a campaign that will run for a long time is still better.