I can see why having a lower rate and lower restrictions for a longer period of time could be a lot better than having just one time off 4 weeks or 8 weeks big campaign and end it just so you can get some brand awareness.
I agree that bitvest (and 777 as well) both managed to have a signature campaign probably longer than anyone else in the entire bitcointalk history, they have been amazing about it and they managed to actually capture a lot of interest from those campaigns. Yet I would also like to ask doesn't it make it a bit more lower quality as well? Quantity over quality is not really something people prefer, usually the sentence is quality over quantity, not saying their campaign has no quality, it has some but it is certainly lower than the other ones when you compare it (by the participants).
It is obvious that the campaign manager is the one who responsible for the campaign quality. I'm quite sure CryptopreneurBrainboss as the manager knows what to run the campaign well.
Lower payrate does not mean low quality campaign, if there are too many low quality posts made by participants, manager will do something to make it better.
It is a matter how to make an effective campaign, I believe there is good communication between the CM and the owner of Bitvest regarding the effectiveness of the campaign.
