Bitcoin Forum

After reading few posts about how successful ferrum network bounty was i detect that the actual amount of the total bounty allocation is just around 45k and i think to myself maybe this was the reason why it become easy for the team to pay hunters?

It seems that bounties with not very large allocations are better because there is a high chance of getting paid over those bounties with 1million pool? am i right or wrong

That's not the right interpretation but you have right point that most small allocation bounty are paying participants. Those shitty campaign that promising huge amount of bounty is obviously a scam. No legit company that will allocate huge amount of tokens just for advertisement in this forum. It will hurt there investors since most of the bounty token will be dump right after they receive payment. Those legit bounty campaigns allocate minimal amount of tokens for the campaigns that's why small caps bounty has high chance to pay participants.

I believe that the quantity of token allocated for hunters isn't a basis for them to paid easily or not. It purely depends on the distributor and the project itself. On the other hand, I've seen that some those who have millions of total supply are those project that turns into shitcoins. Usually projects with decent total suplly are easier to be successful and quite quick to pay hunters at the same time.

Whether big or small, they should pay the bounty hunters, we bounty hunters will always look for a big reward which the team are also willing to pay or has a good reputation so we can expect.

The only advantage i see in low budget bounty is that investors will not blame the bounty hunters when the price dump because they think bounty hunters will just dump right away their reward the moment they will receive it.

it make sense Doranile, because the allocation also determines the team's expectations to meet it all. when the funds that will later be allocated to the bounty do not reach the target of the desired funds, chances are the bounty will not be paid. and one of the causes of this is if there is too much allocation of funds to the bounty, while the team is unable to meet the target funds that were originally planned. it will be healthier when the allocation of funds to the bounty makes more sense to be achieved, so that the team is not overburdened and their expectations can be achieved.

You have a very good impression that bounty campaigns with a small budget are more reliable. However, not because it is easier for them to pay. Scam ICOs that wanted to make the loudest marketing possible offered huge amounts of tokens to attract as many bounty hunters as possible. For them it did not matter what amount they would throw into the budget, because they would never pay it anyway. They might as well say that the bounty budget is 100 million. It does not matter. Thats why the impression that all projects offering a very large budget for a bounty campaign are potentially scam and campaigns with little budget are more reliable.

High or low,its just depends on the total allocated funds for the development.Maybe the realistic value could make them easier to pay but it doesn't mean all the bounties with low token allocations for their project will pay for sure.Everything depends on their quality of project team and goals to achieve in future.

I think there is no difference for bounty  campaign are pay early if they have small amounts in payment, it is always depending on project team and they should successfully getting the amount in their tokens or coins sells. Few years ago we can get bounty rewards on time with any issues because less ico's with good projects but nowadays there so many ico, ieo and more so they have to run the tokens sales long times or reaching the target units so we have wait very long time to get our bounty rewards.

What they still pay is a token that has never been exchanged in the market. This is why there is no guarantee that your reward in the bounty will be high value and possibly lower because it is likely to fall once it has entered the market. And almost all bounties pay for the only real problem here is whether it has value?

I do not agree with the view that bounties with low rewards make payments easily. In my opinion, the payment for a bounty campaign is all about the team members of the project and the money the project has collected on pre-sale. If the project has provided sufficient funds and the project has a good team, then bounty payments can be made successfully, regardless of the amount of the reward.

Having a small allocated fund in bounty campaigns does not guarantee the success of the project. It easy for them to pay bounty hunters, but their work will still count if they will be able to gather enough investors to run the project or the team has a dedication to having a successful project. So, we can't say that if a project has a small bounty allocated fund it is already legit and become successful.

That was a good conclusion. Yeah I agree that having a small bounty pool allocation has the advantage of a project or token to be successful. Because as we all know mostly bounty hunters are just selling the coin after they received it so it turns out to decrease in value compare to its initial value and at the end we are seeing the ROI as red and negative then sorry to the investors. However, it will still depends of the team manager/management.

I'm not saying that a small budget guarantees that the project is not a scam or that it will succeed. I say that projects with very large budgets are more likely to turn out to be scams. Which gives us the impression that projects with small budgets are more reliable.

We can say that they have more chances to be realistic since having a small bounty pool can be easy to reach than having an unrealistic bounty pool.
It also means that their target raised fund is not that high to achieve their goal, but it will also depend on the market situation and if investors will be attracted to the project's platform and make them invest and participate in that project.

It's a safe move for them, to not tag scam or not paying bounty hunters since even they fail or only get minimal amount in crowdfunding the amount allotted for bounties isn't that big that will not affect their budget for the entire project. It's better for hunter since they can be sure from the start that no matter what happen they will be paid as the company will not ruin their name for small amount only. But still depends on the projects idea if it's worth joining since even you'll be paid and there is no quite value of that alt then it will seem no worth too.

I don't agree with you. If the project values its reputation, it will pay any declared amount, no matter how big it is.

The Ferrum Bounty Campaign was successful, but the rewards were very few tokens. if we talk about whether we need to participate in such awards - it is necessary. if we are talking about whether it is profitable - no. I participated and I will hold their tokens for a long time

I heard ferrum network is a promising one and they actually did a social mining, a new trend of bounty which is quality over quantity. And it seems they succeeded in line of the success of Elrond. However, I'm not sure how much their participants got especially many had joined.

At this moment, 2key network had their ongoing social mining. You guys can check it, https://t.me/twokey_official

There could other reasons here, maybe they know that because we are still in the bearish trend, they shouldn't offer big rewards to bounty hunters to control everything.


Unlikely, before allocating resources each project has carefully studied how much they are willing to give. Maybe those projects that has big circulating supply has offer more as opposed to small caps projects. So it doesn't matter if allocation bounty pool is small or big, projects should pay bounty hunters as promised.

That is not the right way of thinking about the bounties. Whether a bounty hunter gets his reward or not, will depend on the success of the project. Irrespective of whether the bounty pool is $45,000 or $1 million, a hunter will never receive his bounty in case the project fails upon listing. So rather than looking for the actual amount, analyze whether the project is viable or not.

Also, rather than the bounty pool amount, the soft-cap is more important. If a project is overpriced, then there is hardly any chance that it will be successful at the market. In such cases, the bounty pool doesn't matter. On the other hand, if a project is priced optimally, then there is a good chance that the bounties will be paid on time.

The ease project to pay bounty participants is not seen from the amount of bounty pool, but the seriousness and  intention to truly appreciate the participants who have helped promote their projects.

Prize have already been mentioned at the beginning of the program and it is based on their own decisions, so why after the fundraising project is complete they become difficult to distribute the rewards. Is there any pressure on them to give a definite of bounty pool? None, that was the result of their calculation.

I completely disagree to the point that projects with small allocations are paying easily and have higher chances of success. BEEASY was one such shitty project which had very small total supply and it sold its token @ $130/token during ICO, later they did not list their token to any exchange officially. It was trading on DEX exchange @$1-3/token. There are many other examples. Even project with large bounty pools pay easily and are very successful, although it may take some time for their token to rise. Project's success depends upon the core concept, team dedication and planning.

The tokens which allocated for the hunters are being distributed by the team not only because of OP's opinions, there's also  factors that affects
the team, but regarding to distributions this kind of act is a sign that if you will seek deeper you'll be able to find good ones that truly paying
for your hard work. It's only time now that can decide if the distributed rewards will turned to into gems.

Low pools can make projects owner to instantly afford the bounty hunters payment without bothering about their token/coin being dump when listed on the trading exchange.

On the other hand, that depends on if the project team are willing to pay because some high bounty allocations also pays their bounty participants easily.

You have a point that most coins that promises million dollars wortg of tokens ends up a shitcoin but its almost same thing with bounties that have low allocations as well, some of them turn scammed or refused to pay bounty hunters as well but better than high reward bounties

A bounty that offers us $100,000 as its bounty pools has a seriousness in developing their project other than a bounty that offers you $1,000,000 as its bounty pool(in this year, we are not talking about the good old days in 2017). I have experienced it once before, a low allocation bounty cares about their investors and the project more than the big one. That was why they were giving a reasonable price to do marketing, unlike some projects that do not care how their investors feeling and trying to go all out using marketing to increase the price of the project.

There are a lot of facts for payment of tokens and their subsequent sale on the exchange - honesty of BM, number of participants, amount of money collected on IEO, and so on..

Yes, It's easy to pay because their allocation is low and it doesn't affect them very much. But this will not be the basis for knowing that a project is truly legit. Because it may be one of their ways to deceive bounty hunters especially investors. This is similar to the bounties I have been to before, I was paid but this is a token of no value and has been abandoned by the developers.

Yes i agree that those who have low allocations is the only one who can pay hunters easily . Because mostly project  that have big allocations are scam wherein they use fake amount of allocations for bounty just to convince hunters to participate and to intimidate joining with with low allocations. Very obvious strategy actually because they want to stay on the top always while others are staying below,, so that they can scam investors or hunters  easily.  

The low bounty allocation prize is indeed preferred by developers, this consideration is because this expenditure does not impose future project costs. But it would be nice if they issued or allocated a minimum of 10% of their hardcap for bounty prize, the bounties hunter also want to enjoy the success as they do. Because without bounty hunters they project were nothing.

to be honest, now I don't even see the allocation for bounty payments. when the project has a product that is running and developed, even with a small application I will follow it. nothing is certain in the crypto market. even though we joined the bounty campaign which provided a large allocation, in many cases what we received did not meet our expectations. price reductions when distribution and allocation cuts can make us disappointed if we take that into account.

Pools are easy to attained and it doesn't need to be alot of investors not even those known investors. Sometimes the project members itself is the one who produce money and thus make the project running. No doubt about that because they can afford. On the other hand, benefits are small depending on how much hyped they will be in the market.

The dump occurs repeatedly for new projects at the beginning of the list exchanger. I don't think big allocations can help the revenue generated, because most of the prices are dumped on the market. at the moment I don't see many projects that pay enough money for bounty participants

I doubt if allocation pool is the problem with bounty payout. Projects who decide to pay, pay at the end of the campaign those who don't decide to pay never pays its a decision on the part of project owners.

It is not really a problem at the pool. because for the bad and high failure projects, they try to set a high pool level to attract more bounty hunters to join and when it succeeds, the project owner will feel sorry and do not want to pay the token .
For potential and highly successful projects, they only offer a reasonable and reasonable pool level. That's why good projects pay very quickly.

You are right, every bounties that have low allocations seem more serious in development and success  of the project that the projects that offers bounty hunters too high bounty allocations

The highest bounty reward that is good on my own list is 400k bounty reward, i think shitcoins are the ones that try to lure bounty hunters by all means to promote bounty projects, they give fake bounty allocations that they can never pay or impossible to achieve

Ferrum is good project, I'm following this campaign. They didn't pay easily as you think, distributed token by sperate three months. I think all projects distribution is perfect done before if distribution complete before listed. After listed they worry about price drop.

I believe that the point is not that the smaller the pool, the better they pay, the project team itself plays a big role and how much money the project raised. Often, projects draw a large amount of the pool and collect enough, but do not want to pay, because they believe that it is too much money for the participants of the bounty. In order for the admins to be honest and fulfill their conditions before the bounty participants, then everything will be fine.

To begin with any allocation to bounty hunters that is given in fiat is useless, we know that tokens will vary in price wildly after they enter the market so if you are interested in bounty campaigns you need to see how big is the percentage they are allocating to bounty hunters compared to the total supply, anything bigger than 1% of the coins most likely means they do not have the intention of paying the bounty hunters or that they want to generate as much as hype as possible only to disappear later with the money of investors.

Well, you might be right. It also sometimes comes faster than expected, compared to how slow project teams find it difficult to pay these days.
On the other hand, there are still some projects with large allocations, who still pay on time, but the ratio is usually very pow, when compared to those with small allocations and whose projects succeeded.

you are right at your point. Any bounty with a huge allocation is probably a scam or will not pay hunters. most campaigns resort to change the token allocation towards the end of the bounty. some due extend the bounty period without increasing the initial allocation. while many project have the habit of delaying payments until hunters has forgotten about the bounty. Most cases, i do blame campaign managers for this mess.
they failed to uphold their integrity because they will get paid at the end of the project maybe in eth or btc.

Not like that, man. The allocation of the bounty pool does not affect the bounty reward distribution. Low allocation, many participants, that means you will get a small reward too, right? it doesn't matter if the project is really good and promising. But if there are projects with many allocations and promises, will you just skip it for fear of the delayed and long distribution process?
It seems you have to change your mindset. Being a bounty hunter requires proper analysis and calculation, all risks are your responsibility because you have chosen to join so don't blame anyone if something is not in line with your expectations. We must become educated bounty hunters. Don't make allocation as the main reference, but the quality of the project must also be considered. Don't just judge from one aspect.

I don't think it has any effect because if a bounty campaign has a good project and can make investors interested, the allocation of many or little bounty campaigns will still be paid, it all depends on the project developer who can make the project useful or not.

You say that it is not profitable and at the same time want to keep their coins as long as possible.Yes, the payment was small, but still do not forget that wants to implement this startup.If they succeed, the participants of the bounty will not remain offended. Remember how many projects there were that collected huge sums and in the end achieved nothing.Ferrum is the absolute opposite.

in fact large allocations or small allocations do not matter, because the success of the project depends on investor funds for further product development and the performance of the team and developers in promoting the project. it's just that most of the ico projects that allocate in small amounts have good opportunities compared to large allocations.

If the number of participants isn't that much then that small pool of reward will flow into those few participants. But this is still the manager's decision if they will allocate all of those dedicated rewards to all of you.
I've seen complains that despite of being few and the expected reward isn't that high but since they are few, it looks high for the distribution for each participant but it didn't go along as expected.

The allocation should have nothing to do with whether bounty hunters get paid or not.  It comes down to a question of whether the project devs are honest and keep their word.  They promise a certain number of tokens right from the start, and they ought to know whether they're going to be able to hold up their end of the deal when they make that promise. 

Ultimately it's still possible for them to scam their bounty hunters no matter how low the allocation is, and there's no way you're going to be able to determine that ahead of time, believe me.

Youre judgement is askew. How come you can say that 45k USD is small and they can pay it right away because of that? At least they pay. The amount given is based on tokens and the token price can changed in the future. About million payment, this can be possible in relation to their tokenomics but the value could also go down or becomes valueless.

I don't think it's a matter of allocation, it's a matter of whether their project works or not. If their project succeeds in touching the hardcap, whatever allocations I think will be distributed. The difference is the story if the project fails, a little or a lot, surely the developer will think again to distribute the tokens. It may even be not shared at all to participants.

It is easier that way. But everyone should still be paid up to the decimals.
The calculator is built for that. They wont really need to think much about number.
The spreadsheet also have its own calculator with just the right formula.

I don't think there is really a hard thing with just basic math now. Although the market will be different. That token could receive a higher value because of low amount of tokens.

Agree, this is not a matter of bounty allocation but about the commitment of the developer team. Last year there were many bounties whose bounty allocations were large and they continued to pay, this was due to a large team commitment to the success of the project. Unpaid bounties may have a cause and one of them is that the project has not yet been traded on the market or the project is not ready to go on the market

It depends on the project manager and the bounty manager, i've joined many bounties with big bounty pool and paid at the right time also.
If the stakes are counted after the bounty ended, or at least 1 week after the bounty ended, i think it's an easy work to send the tokens for the project manager. So if the stakes already counted and tokens are not sent for a long time, it's not the fault of bounty manager anymore, the project manager has responsible for it because the finish line for bounty manager is giving the sheets of counted stakes to the team project manager

It is true that a small allocation always pays the participants of the campaign. Most major allocation is fraud because it promises to be too big and it will hurt investors someday.
So a great opportunity to pay is on a small allocation though because it can be in logic with the brain that if it is too much to gift the forum it will harm investors.

If we're talking about the project around the year 2016-2017, having a huge bounty pool is not a matter for them, since ico's before being able to raise enough funds or achieved their target funds until the end of the project. However, having a huge bounty pool right now seems unrealistic because it is hard to raise funds due to investors are being cautious and still avoiding investment in ico's.

even small allocation for bounty hunter, if the project doesnt get good investment. so, the project will be hard to pay bounty hunter.

it doesnt depend on bounty allocation, but depend on investment reached. big allocation if get big investment too, it would be easy to pay

No its not, this 2-3% bounty allocation is normal i remember before they give upto 5% allocated just for the bounty.
That 45k token is not the issue here you should check how many supply is available in the market so you will know how many percent they given for bounty. All do its just 45k token ,what if they only have 3m total supply so its still normal as others.

right, 2-3% of the bounty allocation is indeed reasonable, and many projects give it that much. therefore if the bounty hunter is designated as the cause of the dump, I don't think that is entirely true, because the tokens circulating in the bounty hunter are not too significant

Most likely but it depends ofcourse if the project becomes successful like Ferrum a successful IEO as far as i know . In fact low bounty allocation was not that recognizable to think that bounty hunters always look in big reward bounties in reality after that to look in the project .

giving an allocation of around 2-4% is quite normal because it is quite a small amount if calculated from 100%. the absurd thing is when they allocate up to millions of dollars, but the hardcap itself is not far from it, or even very high.

but it must be stressed that not all small allocations are easy to pay, and not all large allocations are difficult to pay. for example, in the BCNEX project, I think they paid more than millions of dollars for their supporters, even though it takes time, and conditions, I think they still pay their bounty hunters or airdrop users. so, easy or not the payment of a bounty depends on the team, whether they are professional in their words or not.

It can be right or wrong.
in some bounty campaign, sometimes with a small allocation reward it is not necessarily successful, maybe the project is lucky because the IEO is successful and the bounty allocation is also small so the project doesn't feel burdened.

They always blame the bounty hunter for the dump but the real things is, this is the cause of thier inability to manage a project. If they cannot manage right things with the project of course investors will be affraid and that will be the reason they want to  sell it  the same as bounty hunter.

hmm, not exactly like that. have you ever joined bounty in 2017? a successful megaproject like Crypterium, InsEcosystem, Covesting, Credits, LatiumX was given a full payment to bounty hunter. and that amount was so huge I think it is almost one million allocations. when ETH price still $800/ETH

I'd blame it all on the present market condition, if we are in good market time earning thousands of dollars from bounties is very possible, but really bounties with million dollar rewards are way over the line if we judge it with present market condition, its not reality

Yeah, that is the truth lately. Good projects are confident and allocate small amounts to bounty, and participants are essentially limited. But, this does not mean that all bounties that allocate small amounts are the best. Also, projects that specify a bigger amount in bounty topic essentially distribute the reward less when they collect the expected money. So it is best to investigate the project itself, not the amount specified in the bounty.

In the first place, paying bounty is not the concrete indication of a project being successful. If a project is paying their hunters it doesn't mean they've reached their goal. On the other hand, bounty not paying their hunters on time is also not an indication of a bounty being scam. The point is, bounty's success is based on the roadmap achievement on time by the projects who run the bounty.

Bounties that has low budget allocations mean business, they care about the success project and they have already analyzed everything very well, either softcap met or hardcap met successful they will always pay hunters but low allocations still doesn't clear the fact that they aren't scam either

easy paid is not connect with how much bounty allocation. i ever join some campaign with high allocation and easy paid, and vice versa. its about team progress.


not all ico give fraud when they promise with high allocation, but some of them will did it

Many failed bounties i knew of have low bounty allocations like highest if 500k, so why did they fail? lack of investors or just useless project idea? you can't judge bounties with the rewards they offer bounty hunters, if you do you will miss out

Low allocation bounty pools pays easily.  I have participated in a bounty project,  the allocation was $5k and it was trading. Just before the end of the bounty they had a tokensale event and the price of each coin skyrocket making the bounty allocation x10 of the initial allocation.  The bm came up with unnecessary rules , looking for faults in hunters. Some high allocation bounty even lock up the reward for up to 3 to 6 months. Low allocation is the best it's makes the team to pay easily.

Indeed, the distribution of the fund, large or small, is not an indicator of the guarantee of payments. There were a lot of such projects that had small funds. And many didn't pay anything in the end. The success of the project and the support of the community, as well as the relevance of the product are important here.

It shouldn't be like this. But more precisely this is talking about commitment. If they are committed then they have planned all matters relating to bounties or other marketing to be allocated appropriately and delivered on time. But the problem here is that many of them often change the terms of the bounty. For example, a bounty that should run for only 4 weeks, extended to 8 weeks without additional funding allocation. Then another example of a reward that should be distributed tomorrow, may change for up to 2 months. Actions like this are said to be not commitment and can leave a bad impression for the project.

I am someone who has participated in at least 20-25 different bounty campaigns over the last three years. IMO, having a low bounty allocation is not a guarantee for receiving tokens. From my personal experience, I would say that such campaigns are equally risky as those who have higher allocation. It depends on the concept, team and bounty manager. Allocation is not that important as far as I know.

for now I think the allocation of funds is not that interesting, so it's better to see the platform's advantages and the community's interest in the project. and also the level of popularity of the developer which sometimes makes people interested

bounty distribution is usually in the calculation of the dollar for example the amount of distribution of 50k dollars, so they calculate the price of ICO not on the price on the exchange actively, currently there is no bounty that looks attractive even large distribution is just a formality to attract many people, so not only see the amount low distribution that really pays even there are some cases those who distribute low can also run away

No, it makes no difference. Why would it make a difference? They get the token for free they pay nothing for it. It doesn't matter how much they say they will pay it matters if you going to be paid and the allocation amount has nothing to do with it. Please explain yourself im curious to your thinking.

It matters and it doesn't matters sometimes, yes its true that scammers use big bounty rewards to impress bounty hunters so they can promote the scam project for them but at the same time i have seen bounties with low rewards that still end up scamming investors, its vice versa

Assessment of the allocation of bounty is very necessary to look at, because now there are so many bounty whose allocation is small but the duration is very long, so it will not be in accordance with the work time that will be used by each participant of the bounty.

In my opinion, your opinion is also true. lately there are many low-allocation prize campaigns that get paid for bounties. because their sales quickly reach the set target. but there is also a prize campaign that has a high allocation of funds, but also directly gets payments to hunter participants.

You need to understand that now the bounty program is like a casino. In most cases, you can see how to cheat the investors and the bounty hunters. Nothing will protect us from this-neither the analysis of the project, nor the observation of whitepepper. Therefore, there is no difference in what kind of reward Fund the team offers. Now the most important thing is that the project would not be a fake and you did not waste your time in vain. Try to take more projects and conduct statistics.

Bounty hunters are easily carried away by fake juicy allocation for bounty pools thus get involved in promoting those projects at the end its either the huge token paid is worthless after listing in an exchange or non payment to the participants, I believed this is another factor to be consider when choosing a bounty campaign, low bounty allocation worth doing at least payment is guaranteed a proverb says 'a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush'

I agree as i experience it also, mostly of those low allocation bounties was paid earlier compare to those larger allocation bounties i don't know whats the real reason behind it. or maybe because its just a small amount and cannot do any negative effects on the project as a whole and i hope that it would be more equal in terms of bounty allocation in regards to the bounty duration.

Not all the time because the distribution of the reqards depends on the project and the project manager which has no relation with the amount of token allocation. There are projects which has large token allocation but are paying on time, as what was stated in their website, and vice versa. So more likely, it is a case to case basis and generalization will just result to false information. Better choose a project with good reputation.

In relation to OP's opinion over Ferrum's allocation for bounty participants, they've rewarded their hunters successfully, However I am not at ease with the allocations given to participants, since the market value for each FRM was too cheap at $0.006; yet it won't be called profitable because of the reasons that  it took several months to finish the campaign. Most hunters were too emotional upon seeing the actual value of their rewards. Much better to have small bounty allocations that has huge market value; rather than promoting huge rewards with a centavo value during trading.

Obviously, because small allocation to bounty is easier to achieve since it is small, than to those too good to be true amount of funds that they needed to raised with their ICO.


I have to disagree.

I know we experienced a lot of scams this year but not all of them are that worst, there are still ICOs that are paying what they've promised, and allocating huge amount of tokens in signature campaign doesn't mean that a certain ICO is a scam, it is not also true that investors will be hurt because of dump that is going to happen after they receive the payment just because of huge allocation to signature campaign.

The truth is, every ICO tokens will be dump once they are released to the market, I hope you know that, bounties on signature campaign doesn't have any connection about that.

I would say that this is not a casino. Now, this is a very serious process of selecting and studying the project. if you just participate in all the bounties that appear - then this casino is for you

When the reward is too small you can’t earn, when the reward is too big then this is most likely a fraud. However, this is only 1 factor in evaluating the bounty campaign, you should conduct your research.

I don't agree that reward size influences how fast a payout will be initiated in bounty campaigns. I have done bounties with huge rewards and they paid on time. I also  did those with meager rewards and the pay was delayed for a long time. I don't want to mention their names

45 000 tokens could worth more than 1 million of another tokens. You should know the value in BTC, ETH or USD to compare it. But basically yes, the less reward for bounty hunters, then the biggger chance that you will be really paid.

Today some projects with already listed tokens are holding Bounty campaigns with small pools, so it is almost garanteed that you will get a payment in time. But you should be ready to get 10$ for 8 weeks of the job.

No, it's not about low allocation, it's about the project. If a project is good and honest, they will pay you according to their pool, even the pool surpass 300-500K USD! Ferrum project and bounty eas successful but the hunters did not earn good money after working for 4-5 months! Some of my colleagues earned only 20-25$ for 3 months' work, can you believe? As Ferrum was an ICO project, so the price fallen down significantly! But look at Mycrojobs, they paid over 300K USD and bounty hunters earned thousands of dollars!

you were right,actually bounty payment depend on developers team it self.no matter it much or small amount but if they have commitment to their supporter they will pay it.some projects that collect less money keep give their bounty hunter reward and vice versa, projects that collect huge amount sometime cut allocation or even didn't pay it at all.and congratulation for bounty hunter that get good amount from bounty reward ..in moment we still find good campaign and good reward.

Low allocations sometimes can be very frustrating. Imagine a campaign where there were so many participants competing a a very low pool. When such happens, most of the bounty hunters, most especially social media participants might end up not getting up to a dollar. So there might not be any point in joining low allocation bounty.

i get it that many of bounty hunters weren't paid for the several campaigns they have joined in the past, i have participated to some of it. if all they do is avoid distributing the tokens all they because they have allocated more than they should then they could just distribute quarterly just as some campaigns did. or perhaps before they announce to do the campaign, plan it to just give away few so the dumps won't stole money from them big time.

I don't think this is always the case, because even when team promise to pay $400k for a bounty, remember they are not paying with btc but with their valueless tokens so I don't see why it should be something difficult for them to do, if any bounty pays on time it is because the team are good and knows how to honor their promise, but some team are too stingy and selfish that even allocation is small, they still find it hard to honor their own end of the promise. This has nothing to do with allocation but the team involved.

When a project decides to hold a bounty with a small budget it is more likely that participants would get their rewards and that this token would stay at a good price level after several exchanges listings, because there would be nobody to dump it hard.

I believe that the Bounty team of the company, which allows poor conditions and unrealistic rewards for Bounty hunters, is to blame for all the problems.  If there are too many participants and the pool for the Bounty company is too low, then you can limit the number of participants so as not to worry about rewards and future landfills.  It turns out that the team wants to use the work of the Bounty company to its full potential, but no one wants to pay the remuneration in full.

Actually, I'm not sure, but I also follow many bounties that provide small allocations, some are mostly paid quickly because they don't think about the effect of prices because of bounty hunters, but some are still the same as bounties that use large allocations, they pay with time exactly the same. for ferum itself, I didn't have the chance to follow it because I saw a very small allocation, but it turns out that this bounty provides additional rewards by holding our tokens on social mining activities to get additional rewards.

it doesn't like that.
as far i know from my experience as a bounty hunter.
high or low allocation for bounty is a not guarantee for you get the payment.
but it is a sign to see how the project works, i mean , nowdays bounty already crazy enough to create a pool of a millions for bounty.
and of course we have a sign that project will not going well.
maybe u still get paying from them , but i am totally sure , a large of dumper truck will come soon.
and may u ask, "so i am right. itsn't ? "
not at all , low allocation doesn't mean u will get the payment,like i say before, its just a signal.
solid ecosystem already planned inside , a simple worlds ,"the bounty is logical and reasonible"
now it depend who people managed that bounty, a good one if the team hire a bounty manager.
since the bounty manager doesn't want get a low reputation about what bounty he managed.
but the worst, just see vanta.
total for bounty just about 1.5% from total token sale.
they don't even get the hard cap.
and i didn't get the payment.

I've joined bounty before but I stopped because it took so long for them to release the tokens.

I am not sure if low allocation pays instantly but hope there is a criterion that they follow when awarding the tokens after the bounty.

they allocate the bounty pools lower so people won't complain if the reward is reduced by half like other projects did, also reduce the reward by half would make the participants are angry and they will just make the scam accusation against you because they are greedy.

I don't support low allocation bounty pays easily. Some devs didn't pay any rewards even after low allocation. All things is up to distribution teams or admin or sometimes bounty manager. My experience is enough to justify. Only for distribution process, character is the main of distribution admin. Admin rejected several people without any valid cause.

Its always easy to disburse small funds for bounty as rewards frankly, but i dont think that is really a case if the managers are fraudulent. I have seen projects pay out as high as 300k usd to bounty participants with zero hassles. So character is usually the focus. The bad players will always find a way to deny payment. We should focus more this than the size of allocation

the conclusion is not like that, you have to read various opinions of friends here, there is a more appropriate explanation.  Fast or slow distribution does not depend on the number of bounty pools.  it all depends on the schedule set by the bounty manager and the development team, even if there is a change, it is usually due to waiting for conducive conditions.  we also need to know that change can happen at any time, we must understand it as a risk.

you might be right with that because small pool bounties are mainly legit and tells the truth that they only have that small amount of funds but bigger bounty pools are sometimes unbelievable  .

 some users were attracted and will join imediately because they think they are jackpot when they see those type of bounties while others were just skeptical because they think they budget is too large and too promising , so probably they will hesitate to join on those  .

You are neither right nor wrong. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. Howeve, I disagree with you. Because unless otherwise the bounty was paid in a trading coin like ETH or BTC, its actual equivalence stated in USD may not be true. They might promise you millions of dollars only for to finish the bounty and realize your tokens are worth just some few dollars.

Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. But does low bounty pool pays the hunters? Alchemy bounty pools just $50,000 for a bounty to span 5 months. And about 2,000 participants are already involved, now when the bounty is completed, of course the team will gladly pay the hunters about $25 on average for 5 months work.
Now, how does that pay for the hunters?

That may not always be the case.  There are bounty campaigns that had a pool of hundreds of thousands of dollars that have paid hunters promptly.  I don't think the allocation is a determining factor in deciding how easily the bounties are paid, I think it's more about the team and their integrity: how committed they to honouring their bounty commitments.

In my opinion there is no difference between bounty companies with a large pool and a small one. The difference is only in the price of the coin. Since in companies with a large pool you can get a lot of coins that will cost very little. But fooling both of them. Passed the time when it was possible to get a lot of coins and in the future to wait for an increase in the price of them. Now you need to find a project that will not deceive you. Big will pool or a small this not it is important.

Either because not all low allocation bounties does pay anytime but somehow we can really presume that they would pay up since it isnt really that big
unlike into those unrealistic million of usd pools. The thing here is that even if youve been paid up you cant be sure on what would be the value of the
token you have received.So its still on half chance for you to say  that its completely better.

A team promoting its ICO will always strive to pay for the work of the bounty hunters with their tokens. And if the amount of planned fees is less, then the payment also becomes small. Recently, I have not seen such payments of 1 million dollars to bounty hunters.

One more thing reason I realized is the price of the coin/token offered on the ICO. I think it also depends on that, if the price is cheap then they would open a large bounty pool then if the price is almost a dollar, then they only create a small bounty pool. It's just my opinion though cause I've been in bounty too before, based on my observations...

Its rare to see the teams coming good with their promises. Those days are long gone now. These days bounty hunters are happy if the tokens they get even worth 10$ when selling in total on an exchange. Even that is not achieve-able because of the low market making demand of the coin and lack of buyers.

However every participant should calculate the precedes of the fund raising before joining the project. I remember some projects having deceived their participants and then ran away with the manager in their cahoots. TokenSuite was one of those groups of scammers who have left this forum for now.

Good times for ICO and bounty hunters are gone, but I'm sure they'll be back again.
The price of a coin in ICO may be significant, but in my opinion the higher it is, the worse for bounty participants. I am talking about a moment like this, which is a lack of fresh capital on ICO market. Just the higher the price, the harder it is to maintain its level. It often happens that the price of $1 during ICO drops by 90% or more after listing on exchange. When the starting price is lower, the fall after listing is smaller and it is easier to return to the initial price later. Same is with bounty pool, if is higher then the drop after listing can be stronger.

In my opinion, there is only one way to keep the token from depreciating. No need to set its value equal to $1. The token price must be set to 1 Satoshi. In this case, he will not be able to fall less than this value)

man, bounty allocation and target sales are totally different
low target sales doesnt mean low bounty allocation too, that's why it cant pay easily

---

even on low allocation but dont get any good investment, the dev cant pay bounty hunters
dev must consider wisely to set bounty allocation and target sale as realistic and achievable

Not an ideal thing to be done on setting out that 1 sat price and considering to that price then what would be the total supply of that one?
For sure it would be more than on the highest supply on the current market as of today just like bytecoin which do have 184 billion supply
having $0.000054 price. How much more on 1 sat priced one? It will have a tremendous number of supply and it isnt that ideal or good thing.

Even if the token price is set to 1 sat, you can't even sell it since you won't find or hardly to find any buyer who will buy your token. It's like your token worthless

How is the team supposed to pay the bounty rewards if the expected minimum token sale goals have not been met in the token sales? There is no need to overcomplicate the known stuff, the low bounty campaigns pay easily because the dumped tokens by the bounty hunters are not even 1% of the total market circulation. I agree with the opinions about the delaying payments in the bounty distribution in case of the project reached the hard cap.

A smart idea, but it's not about blocking the possibility of a price drop, but to protect the price against it. Of course, there is no single and reliable way to do it. It is important not to give away huge amounts of free tokens at promotional events and for bounty campaigns. And that's why I think that a smaller bounty pool is better. I think that to secure the price, it is also good to block the sale of tokens for at least a few months after the end of the ICO.

If the advertising campaign is carried out with a limited budget, this will entail minimal payments to bounty hunters. In this case, limits on the number of participants should be introduced.

Yes, this is also some way, but the organizers want the campaign to be attended by as many bounty hunters as possible, so probably the best is simply to optimize the budget so that it is attractive to participants and not unnaturally large - which would later cause dump coins on exchange and dump the price. Therefore, calculating the budget should be done by experts, not people who just look at the market and think that they know what will be the best.

The developers could release the coins to the bounty hunters immediately but they don't, they use the excuse that bounty hunters are going to sell their coins to the market immediately crashing the price of the coin and that accusation is ridiculous, even if bounty hunters sell their coins in the market as soon as they receive their coins if the price of the coin crashes because of this then it means that it was a bad coin and that has nothing to do with the bounty hunters.

Well it is a bullshit reason to hold back on the bounty rewards but the bounty hunters have also an agreement to abide by any changes in terms during the course of the bounty hunting. So in a way they put the bounty hunters in a jinxed situation where you cant get the reward and even if you do the project will be a failure and the price of the token will go down. If they knew that hunters dump their tokens why did they opt for it in the first place? Poor marketing skills.

Then the participant has nothing to do but cry at the bad habit of participating in the first place whatever the allocation may have been.

Even if they have distributed all bounty to all bounty hunters, it  won't affect their token price since it's only a very small portion of their total token supply. The reason why a new token got dump is because the number of buyer is very low compared the seller.


That's why they never distributed it too bounty hunter first, instead they are distributed it to their investors first, and then to bounty hunters. But surely, they dont need to afraid about their token price got dumped by bounty hunters as i've described on above.
 

I dont think so , cause before campaigns with high bounty pool always pay thier bounty hunters and now even low allocation bounty projects dont pay because after the campaign they went to scam.

At the moment, most ICOs are scams, so it's really hard to check the developers real intentions. However, we can notice the tendency that scammers usually allocate huge budgets to bounty, because they do not care what happens to the price after the end of the ICO, because they just want to disappear. Projects that want to secure prices, more carefully set a budget for a bounty campaign, and usually these are smaller amounts.

It is not always true, sometimes you find projects with high bounty pools and paying their participants at the same time, so it is depending on the project itself and its legitimacy, in my view. In addition, when the allocation for the bounty is low, the payment rate for each participant will be low too.

If their project is a big success getting more funds, big or small prize money for participants will definitely be paid by them. Especially if the project is indeed serious and respects bounty participants, so it's easy for developers. Now we only need to examine which projects will pay well, no matter big or small, it is important to pay, because we already know the current conditions that bounties are not as good as in 2017 and 2018 early.

Small bounty pools can help also for those project did not pay even the project is legit if you sell your tokens in a dummy exchanges that have no volume and less price than you expected before you join in the campaign.

It's still go down to the bounty manager that manage the campaign, I have experienced getting paid by campaign that has a huge allocation, allocation can motivate a bounty hunter to join but more so in the kind of project that they are running, you don't want uncertainty when joining a campaign, for me allocation is only second, the project's potential is the most important thing.

1 million pool bounty at this market is definately not worth your time. It will definately end up as scam or reduced payments. What I would say is, join a bounty campaign which promises reasonable amount payments. That doesn't mean it has to be too low. Again, if the total allocation is very small then you would probably earn a few cents worth of tokens which will eventually lose its value even further. So make your time worthwhile.

Its still not an assurance though yet i do have even the experience on joining a low budget allocation type of bounty but it do still end up on not paying its participants in the end.

This is why i can really oppose that it isnt an assurance thing that low pay do pay in the end yet there are even big allocation pools that pays out unexpectedly.Overall its doesnt really
matter if its low or high allocation because all would be paid on token value which is still a estimated one since it isnt even traded on the market so basically means we are
talking about worthless tokens since from the beginning.  ;D

Too good to be true, it doesn't mean the project is going to pay the $1mln to bounty hunters, no matter whatever promises they make. I don't think the project's future depends on the bounty campaigns, the market situation is the main determinant from my experience.

Aside from the market it will also depends the support of many crypto enthusiasts here in crypto currency community. Each of us hoping that the market will pump and for sure the whole community will be demand but as of this time market is not as good. Also, bounty nowadays is so rare to find a legit one but I still believe that there are some a legit in which need much more time to find a legit one.

Most of us here feels so frustrating finding a good and legit bounty campaign in which some of users stop to be a crypto enthusiasts or they just rest for a while since market is so down and wait the market will come back. As one of the crypto enthusiast, I also feel so tired but I still believe that the crypto will be demand someday in the future.

Champaign with payment in bitcoin or ethereum will give us certinity although its price cheap when bitcoin price drop. But if compared with token Bounty , no one could guarantee that we will received our Bounty reward. As we know many dev team cut bounty allocation , or even didn't paid at all. Working in this Champaign sometimes will make us angry or bored to do Bounty task.

Ferrum is a relevant example because their total bounty distribution is not so damaging to prices, but if they do not increase supply later, their price effectiveness will not develop. Large allocations are also needed in connection with the combustion strategy, etc. To increase demand and better supply. Apart from the total supply of the campaign, the prize allocation is always set at around 35%, and this must still ensure that their sales reach the target, or they will not pay at all like the others.

this is when the project raise enough money. mostly the hard cap. so they will don't care giving away any amount of tokens the initially promised. but when a project don't raise enough money. specially nowadays when projects totally getting failed or selling even less tokens than the bounty allocation then they'll either reduce bounty tokens or simply don't pay the bounty participants.
I think op got a good point. bounty with low allocation have better chance to be paid.

You can take part in signing bounty to pay for bitcoin and Ethereum if you are selected and in a category to support signatures due to strict rules. Not everyone can follow the bounty signature with bitcoin or Ethereum payments.

usuallly it has strict rules , not all rank could participate in signature campaign with btc payment. Although it has less amount but there is no chance to scamm. Most of Bounty manager that handle it has good reputation, they really filtered which is participants or project that will accept. Hopefully all Bounty manager did it , so scam projects possibility will decrease alot.

huge allocation just the way to make bounty hunter interested promoting their project. But most of them failed in market , too many allocation for bounty hunter and finally they dumped it on market. If we see on this kind project , maybe better to be Bounty hunter . they didn't need to spend money but get profit bigger than investors that spend their money and take risk loss..i see alot of campaign with huge allocation and finally failed.

Some differences can be observed if you check the main requirements for both kinds of signature campaigns. The BTC or ETH paying campaign managers are looking for quality posters while the token paying bounty campaigns have no such restrictions on every board. The token-based payments have a better vision considering the future valuation in case of listing on good exchanges.

When it comes to campaigns that do pay up established coins like btc and eth then its just normal for managers to impose strict qualifications rather than to those campaigns that
do only pays up with tokens.

We know that they wont really have a limit when it comes to participant counts yet they do need max exposure.One things for sure that even low allocation bounty pools doesnt guarantee for you to be paid up.

At least they pay and this is what matters for many bounty hunters. The BTC or ETH paying signature campaigns have better pay rates compared to the receiving dead tokens after 6 months of hard work in the project's bounty campaigns. The low allocation means the lower level of dumping after getting listed on the exchanges, IMO.

It's the managers position to enroll you up once being selected to the campaign, It's  a tough competitions inside the forum as btc/eth paying
campaigns is very selective, only few campaigns offers this rewards and it's limited to selective members according to the managers pick.
Needs to provide decent efforts to be noticed and have the opportunities to participates.

The problem with the large allocation in the bounty pool is that after the listing, many bounty hunters want to sell tokens as soon as possible. It is a race who will be the first to sell. Because of this, the larger the bounty pool, the more likely the price will fall more. I think it is much more profitable to join bounty campaigns with a small bounty pool, as it is more likely that the price will fall less and we will earn more.

We are still in bear market so i do not expect huge payouts from bounties with high allocation, many bounties with low allocation keeps paying bounty hunters while those bounties with 300k upward ends up deceiving bounty hunters, this is a matter if choice

It really does not matter much if allocation is big or small, but if the price is available at listing, bounty hunters will sell at ANY price. The problem is not that they will sell, they will always do it,,, no matter what. The problem is for the investors who have to either try help buy back more (which some do not mind at lower than ICO price), or dump as well. Guess which is more likely;)

Bear or bullish on market doesn't give any effect with bounty. You won't guarantee will get paid higher when market on bullish, since most of bounties only scamming their own participants. Maybe they are paying you, but in the end their token ended up with worthless since it doesn't listed in big exchange

The market affect since it can decrease in or increase the value of your share and although we encounter a numerous scam campaigns before we should not disclose this things since I saw some campaigns paying their participants although the payment is low but still I'm glad to see those since they are paid up. And this is the sign maybe those valuable camp will comeback and the new one will enter the scene.

Small or huge bounty allocation if the managers are all trustworthy, you can get your rewards, it's better to get into the campaign that has good potential to succeed than look for allocation, the allocation has nothing to do with it, look for the project then the allocation, not the other way around.

Let's all have it at the back of our mind that a shitcoin will still remain a shitcoin whether they have low allocation or high allocation, doing research is the best thing you can use to safe yourself, any project can turn big either ways

They can pay easily, but there's no guaranty that the project is good, it's better to find a good project but with a huge allocation that will distributer all bounty, don't go for a lesser one, your time and effort is gold it should be compensated, if there is none anymore better take a vacation.

the point is to always do research even if only to join their bounty program, because at least you have to make the best use of the time you have, so that the rewards received are truly worth it, so low or high allocations do not guarantee because both have clear potential will have a difference

Its better to be paid than never but if you do being paid by peanut amounts then i would still consider this as useless.
After you work for how many months and putting all the effort and time with it but youve been paid which isnt worth on the
hard work you have done and also most of the times where token payments do end up on having no value then its still
considered to be unfortunate.Low allocation doesnt guarantee on being paid up but much more better compared to those who
set out millions of dollars.

Well maybe your correct beause almost all the bounty campaigns that i joined are paying with fewer bounty allocation while bounty campaign with bigger allocation dont pay me and end of being scam. But if you want to find legit and paying bounty campaign try to join group with professional bounty manager he will make sure, that the project that we are promoting will pay you.

Actually it's maybe depends on there price of token quality because if there was planing 5$ one token for IEO/ICO then never possible 1million of bounty allocation.
Otherwise, at this time unless and death project will pay larger bounty allocation because there has no value in exchange market. Personally i am happy for participating low allocation bounty pools but if there was limiting participating.

The scam bounties used a large allocation to attract the promoters to join in their campaign. This happened so many times when there was a project that offered million dollar worth of tokens to the bounty participants to promote the garbage project. I hope hunters will be smart enough to avoid this scam campaign.

I've promoted bounties with low allocations that still don't pay up the rewards they own bounty hunters today, low allocation or high allocation is not the case here, you can still get cheated or scammed but yet it's true that scam bounties use large allocation to lure hunters but that's old trick

That's true, but maybe not all that. and also according to me, it's also better to look for a fairly moderate but there is certainty, rather than just promising the good things in most campaigns but there is only to lie, so it is really in need to find relevant information about the project bounty that we follow so that we can make sure to the truth.

Most of the time scam bounties use high stakes rewards to lure hunters to work with them, there are no assurance to what will happen after the campaign got ended high or low rewards bouty campaigns still depends from how the team distributes and how the BM to take actions for the campaign participants, good campaign managers are the first in line in terms of asking fror the rewards.

I don't know why you're still talking about it. I haven't been to bounties for a while so I don't know what's going on there if bounties campaigns are worth it. As far as I can remember, in the past several bounties, only a few have made decent income. You are right that it is not in pools or allocations, because it is in the project if it is realistic and will make a profit in the crypto industry.

Low allocation will pay easily to the bounty hunters, but the problems every company is blaming the Bounty hunters for the price decreases. That's why many people are suggesting to distribute the bounty in the form of stable coins and it will surely help the company to stable their coin price for the long term. Even sometimes they are taking long for payments.

Still ,theres no guarantee that low allocation bounty pool will pay cause i joined a bounty before with low allocation and they said they will pay one week after the bounty ends ,untill bounty hunters were not paid.

It doesn't matter if Its big or low bounty pool it still depends in the succession of the project and the accumulated funds. if their ICO fails they can still pay you with their coins BUT no value coin. that's why it still depends on the succession of the ICO.

If you can see most of the time where Bounties do have that title for ex. $1000000 in USD allocation - but those were on token imaginary value
since they do pertain on the ICO price and they do allocate those big numbers and i agree that this is some sort part of technique on letting
people join without even knowing that those value are still imaginary.

DYOR is the key but people cant really just spent up enough time to verify everything thats why they do carelessly join up bounties

which do see that it do pay big without even trying to realize if the team behind or project itself is worth.

Knowing the truth on initial phase is impossible even how good the manager is, if the project team behind do have bad intentions
since from the start then expect that bad things will happen in the end of the line.
Bounties nowadays are trash but there are still people who do engage with it and hoping that they can still extract out some profits with less effort
but most of them do still end up on not receiving anything when bounty is over, if they do then it do ends up to be a shit token.

You're right in that. Others like hunters even though it is obvious that a project/coin is fake or scam, they are still promoting it. There are also others who do not know whether it is legit or not. It's just a waste of effort. What I do sometimes join in giveaways or airdrops with paid proof that I know about my other friends.

I used to think the same before but not anymore, bounty allocations whether big or small don't mean they will pay, many bounties with small allocations can still end up cheating, for example blockburn and iq cash

In such cases do report these projects under "Scam Accusations" section of the forum. I know that bounty hunters under the terms and conditions that bounty may be withdrawn without prior notice but still filing a report there will at least save some other people from the frustration.

Of course it is a side effect of joing a bounty campaign - they are worthless tokens anyway so its better to move your view from them and move on with bitcoin as the main cryptocurrency to amass. We have new bitcoin signature campaigns coming up every few days and everyone should join those over any bounty campaign.

Imo there's always enough time to make a research but we tend to abandon the research due to the lack of information behind the developers and the project that's why others just join right away expecting to get paid.

Yeah, even the smallest paying bitcoin signature campaign is probably better than most bounty campaigns as payments rarely gets delayed or extended.

maybe not everything is like that, because some projects that offer great gifts also pay bounty hunters like the agreement on the rules, it might be difficult to find current high-paying but trustworthy projects, so when we read projects with high salaries we also have to check the website concerned with projects such as Twitter, Facebook and others, then see how many who support the project also check in the comments column to see what the followers' responses are, usually I always do that before joining a project.

Agree, IQ cash is still running their bounty, but Blackburn has already cheated which they are not answering any question to people about the bounty and their listing in other exchanges, this makes they are releasing their value in which the coin is listed on exchanges.

It depends on how a bounty hunter would deal up with things, if they would done it if they do saw some payment proofs or not but you cant

really avoid not to think that you should rush in fast so that you can get more or wont able to be ran out of tokens since we do know that once an

airdrop do happen then lots of people do join which is normal.As long you dont give out something like KYC then its just good.


Following good managers is a good one but we shouldnt rely to them but it is way more better rather stepping in without even knowing on what youre dealing with
there were also some newbie managers but actually have the experience on handling out campaigns though.

I have also been a victim of bounties previously especially when it came to KYC when I first started here on crypto and forum. I was also able to invite other people to just get rewards. So it just led everyone to feel sorry for them. That is one of those mistakes made. So now I have to figure out if it's really legitimate before I share it with others.

yes. if you are too hasty to research a project without certain information, I think that there is only a dead end even though the follow-up information will be obtained sooner or later and also you cannot take the risk to ensure a project because if there is a slight error it might be able to fatal because of misjudging a project.

I agree with you if we rely too much on managers, we will not learn to go forward and only depend on them forever, and also the information is a little more helpful because surely we will find continuation of this little information, honestly I prefer manager beginners and reliable like that who have the field around him, also usually they will work hard and help their supporters indiscriminately.

True. Big or small allocation payment still unsure if the projects has a lot of problem, one thing that most common conflict is the distribution phase where the team always delay the payment. Good example of this is xdb that dont pay their participants. Small allocation can be more assured than big, I only experienced those trusted payment from huge allocation was the bull run season before ICOs fall down.

Such case where you also staking your name inviting other people to participate only to find out that there's nothing or no value tokens will be spread out as a rewards. Sometimes it's quite better to experienced it alone so you don't need to worry about other people if your participation resulted to a scam.

You can easily move forward and simply forget about the experienced and move on trying to search for  more realistic bounties.

I never tried to join in any bounty that required KYC as a mandatory for the participants to received their payments. The old trick will not work for the second time again. In my opinion, if this time people very familiar with this. I hope newcomers will aware of this too.

Granted, that is another of the problems I see with the distribution of bounty tokens/coins. In the long run, hunters and participants miss out on what they should receive in return for completing tasks. Others are forgotten because of many other campaigns. Sometimes there are more follow up processes that take longer.



So I admit to that part. Sometimes, we also have to make mistakes to learn as long as they never repeat.
It is important that when we have projects involved we look at not only a legitimate source but two or more and when everything fits together, we are safe.
If I find anything suspicious, I will immediately contact official contact details to confirm whether they are true.

For those who do have zero knowledge and doesnt care about their personal info then they will surely took the bait and comply on whats being asked.
Later on they would realize that it isnt really worth to take up the risk just for you to get some shit tokens or wont really get any value at all.
Its just dumb to think that you would need to comply KYC procedures just for you to get those bounty tokens which is bullshit.
Low allocation doesnt mean they do pay up easily because it will always depend or vary on teams discretion even if they do have big allocation of shit tokens
to be paid of, if their motive from the start is not to pay up their participants then thats a disaster.

Someone who is new to the crypto ecosystem generally is not aware of these identity scams and blackmailed KYC for bounty payment that projects do on their bounty hunters. So they are going to give it away anyway. They should realize though about what they are doing but they get tempted by the empty promises. This cycle continues and the only winner is the ICO owners themselves.

But I am sure very few of them actually read these advice.