E-coin Fixed signature campaign(Only Hero and Staff/Legendary)||Full

[siameze]

I understand things like this happen and no it isn't Mexxer's fault. I joined later in the campaign and only got a week in before this fiasco occured so I don't expect to see any return for my time. Likewise E-coin should not expect that I should consider using their services going forward. 

[Swordsoffreedom]

I apologize for the bad news , but the escrow for the campaign , i.e master-p seems to have "exit-scammed"^[1]. As he was the only person who had access to the campaign funds, I'm sorry to say that the campaign will be discontinuing with no payments for the last month.

Apologies for any inconveniences again
In case the new owner of the "master-p" account returns and refunds(highly unlikely), everyone will be paid out.

Follow-up [1]: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306301.0

Well that sucks when the escrow itself is the scam alas another fiasco.
I can't say it couldn't be helped since the forum is suspicious of new campaigns and vouches for escrow that in itself can be a risk, reputation wise it is a bit of a hard hit so even a token gesture would be nice but I guess e-coin is short on the coins.
Oh well tks anyways.

[Lutpin]

Well that sucks when the escrow itself is the scam alas another fiasco.
I can't say it couldn't be helped since the forum is suspicious of new campaigns and vouches for escrow that in itself can be a risk, reputation wise it is a bit of a hard hit so even a token gesture would be nice but I guess e-coin is short on the coins.
Oh well tks anyways.

Guess they are,
that's why they are abled throw $190 into their promo raffle,
but aint got the coins to pay out participants.

[Swordsoffreedom]

Well that sucks when the escrow itself is the scam alas another fiasco.
I can't say it couldn't be helped since the forum is suspicious of new campaigns and vouches for escrow that in itself can be a risk, reputation wise it is a bit of a hard hit so even a token gesture would be nice but I guess e-coin is short on the coins.
Oh well tks anyways.

Guess they are,
that's why they are abled throw $190 into their promo raffle,
but aint got the coins to pay out participants.

Well as your personal sig says
There is nothing permanent except change.
(Sorry that just seemed perfect as a reply no chump change lol)

[mexxer-2]

E-coin seem in favor of a proportionate payment , i.e why post count and the counting for days , the signature remained in place is being done. I notice some people still seem to have the signature, all the participants are being PMed, (maybe a bit unfair to the people who had the signature until 2-3 days after the announcement was made, and only then they removed the signatures) their "Days Signature remained in place" will be counted until today. For all others, it will be counted until the day the announcement was made( Dec 28 )
The proportionate payment will be counted as follows: Posts made*Rate(Per post)*Days signature remained in place/30

There might be a few mistakes in my "formula" for calculating the payments, hence it may change in the future or if E-coin are in favor of another "method" of calculating that seems fair to them.

Edit: Maximum paid posts are 65 and another addition to the formula is above's product*posts made in "Service ANN/Service disc"/5. Maximum amount of posts counted for posts in Service ANN/Disc is 5 and to be fair, if anyone has less than 2 posts in such sections the value will be , by default 2.

[botany]

E-coin seem in favor of a proportionate payment , i.e why post count and the counting for days , the signature remained in place is being done. I notice some people still seem to have the signature, all the participants are being PMed, (maybe a bit unfair to the people who had the signature until 2-3 days after the announcement was made, and only then they removed the signatures) their "Days Signature remained in place" will be counted until today. For all others, it will be counted until the day the announcement was made( Dec 28 )
The proportionate payment will be counted as follows: Posts made*Rate(Per post)*Days signature remained in place/30

There might be a few mistakes in my "formula" for calculating the payments, hence it may change in the future or if E-coin are in favor of another "method" of calculating that seems fair to them.

Edit: Maximum paid posts are 65 and another addition to the formula is above's product*posts made in "Service ANN/Service disc"/5. Maximum amount of posts counted for posts in Service ANN/Disc is 5 and to be fair, if anyone has less than 2 posts in such sections the value will be , by default 2.

Thanks for working to sort this out.
While it won't impact me, the second addition to the formula (*posts made in "Service ANN/Service disc"/5) might be deemed unfair.  After all, people might have multiple days to make those posts.
You may offer them an opportunity to make those missing posts. I can't think of another way to fix this.   

I am perfectly okay with any payment, but from an analytical point of view, I would like to improve the formula. 
Pay per post = Fixed Rate / 65

Payment = Minimum (Pay per post * Valid posts, Fixed Rate * Days signature remained in place / 30)
If somebody has made close to 65 posts, both your formula and mine will give the same result.
That would serve e-coins purpose.

[mexxer-2]

While it won't impact me, the second addition to the formula (*posts made in "Service ANN/Service disc"/5) might be deemed unfair.  After all, people might have multiple days to make those posts.

Valid point, I will propose a 1 Service ANN/Disc post added for every week left, I believe its fair.

I am perfectly okay with any payment, but from an analytical point of view, I would like to improve the formula. 
-snip-
If somebody has made close to 65 posts, both your formula and mine will give the same result.
That would serve e-coins purpose.

Appreciate your opinion but as you said, its the same result both ways, hence it would be simpler with my formula.

[botany]

While it won't impact me, the second addition to the formula (*posts made in "Service ANN/Service disc"/5) might be deemed unfair.  After all, people might have multiple days to make those posts.

Valid point, I will propose a 1 Service ANN/Disc post added for every week left, I believe its fair.

I am perfectly okay with any payment, but from an analytical point of view, I would like to improve the formula. 
-snip-
If somebody has made close to 65 posts, both your formula and mine will give the same result.
That would serve e-coins purpose.

Appreciate your opinion but as you said, its the same result both ways, hence it would be simpler with my formula.

Hmm.... Call me a perfectionist, but it is really not that complicated.
If somebody has been here for 50% of the time (say 15 days) and made 50% of the posts required (around 32), I would say it is fair that he receives 50% payment.
Your formula would give him only 25%.

At the same time, I don't think my formula is unfair to ecoin as well.

[mexxer-2]

Hmm.... Call me a perfectionist, but it is really not that complicated.
If somebody has been here for 50% of the time (say 15 days) and made 50% of the posts required (around 32), I would say it is fair that he receives 50% payment.
Your formula would give him only 25%.

At the same time, I don't think my formula is unfair to ecoin as well.

I see what you're trying to say, but my point is , E-coin is paying for exposure(quality in this context). If a user doesn't make(made) enough posts, I believe he deserves a lower payment and as you said, payment for posts close to 65 posts(which is the min post requirement for getting the payment, if the campaign had continued without loss of funds) are better for users, than someone making 20-30 posts by now. I also am against users that make last minute/day/week posts, as they will more or less spam to boost their post count and most of the users had only 10 or so days to complete the campaign.

[siameze]

I think I was in for exactly one week until the announcement. I announced the removal of my signature in this thread, I can go back and find the post in a bit.

[minifrij]

I removed my signature on the 31st December, though I don't particularly mind what date is put into the formula. I'd be just happy to get paid at this point.

[notaek]

Honestly, I don't remember when I changed my signature. So, I'll leave it on mesmer for his final calculation.

[mexxer-2]

Calculations done, as stated in the doc sheet. If you find a problem with your payment amount, please PM me.
Even if E-coin refuses to give an additional payment(highly unlikely) , the refund provided by master-p is nearly enough to pay the amounts.

[siameze]

Calculations done, as stated in the doc sheet. If you find a problem with your payment amount, please PM me.
Even if E-coin refuses to give an additional payment(highly unlikely) , the refund provided by master-p is nearly enough to pay the amounts.

Noted, and thank you for your honesty and diligence, which seems to be in short supply today in these forums.

I do hope all that were affected by the master-P brouhaha eventually get fully compensated. I am still unsure what to think about the "hack" story but am following the developments in the associated threads.