Re: Updated Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns

[dabbs]

Does someone want to fill me in on what this is? How do I get into one?

[1714057284]

1714057284

[1714057284]

1714057284

[1714057284]

1714057284

[1714057284]

1714057284

[1714057284]

1714057284

[redsn0w]

So it seems quite confirmed that redisn0w was incorrect about needing the phone number only for sign-up.  You do need it for withdrawal and other actions which means that finding an internet one-time sms wouldn't help.  Anyway, I don't know if it's worth it to put a note on your OP about the .5% fee and the telephone number for the bit-x campaign.

Good idea, added.

Hey Mitchełł, can you also remove the 0.10 bitcoin bonus part? It seems the bonus was removed, due to the weekly payment and also due the removal of the min. limit of posts necessary for receive the payment. 

Thanks for the attention.

[Mitchell]

Hey Mitchełł, can you also remove the 0.10 bitcoin bonus part? It seems the bonus was removed, due to the weekly payment and also due the removal of the min. limit of posts necessary for receive the payment. 

Thanks for the attention.

Will do that right now. Thanks, must have missed that.

[Dajve]

Does someone want to fill me in on what this is? How do I get into one?

Choose one from the op that is applicable to your membergroup, put their signature in, don't spam and get paid to post. You don't get much as a Newbie but you get more as you achieve a higher forum rank.

[Quickseller]

Da dice just paid out their first week of payments and they were way under budget (had budgeted ~8 btc but spent less then 2 btc). You can probably move them to active.

[bitgeek]

Da dice just paid out their first week of payments and they were way under budget (had budgeted ~8 btc but spent less then 2 btc). You can probably move them to active.

I read they cut payments to a number of their posters claiming that they don't pay for "one liners", although there was no such thing in the rules. If any of you are planning to join think twice, because they may randomly decide that your posts are too short or not constructive enough.

[Quickseller]

Da dice just paid out their first week of payments and they were way under budget (had budgeted ~8 btc but spent less then 2 btc). You can probably move them to active.

I read they cut payments to a number of their posters claiming that they don't pay for "one liners", although there was no such thing in the rules. If any of you are planning to join think twice, because they may randomly decide that your posts are too short or not constructive enough.

If you are referring to yahoo's posts from last week, then I had reviewed the last three pages of his posting history and they were mostly spam. I am not sure why he was not banned during the last week for insubstantial posts+paid signature

IMO campaign operators need to do more to actually fight spam

[bitgeek]

Da dice just paid out their first week of payments and they were way under budget (had budgeted ~8 btc but spent less then 2 btc). You can probably move them to active.

I read they cut payments to a number of their posters claiming that they don't pay for "one liners", although there was no such thing in the rules. If any of you are planning to join think twice, because they may randomly decide that your posts are too short or not constructive enough.

If you are referring to yahoo's posts from last week, then I had reviewed the last three pages of his posting history and they were mostly spam. I am not sure why he was not banned during the last week for insubstantial posts+paid signature

IMO campaign operators need to do more to actually fight spam

No, it's not about yahoo. I meant these people who complained in the thread today about not getting full payment. I agree that managers should be strict, but they also should make the rules clear.
Dadice's current rules give them free choice to decide whether your posts qualify for payment or not and as a result nobody knows if their posts will end up being paid for. At the same time this allows the manager to cheat posters by cutting their payment by a small number every month and blaming it on whatever (like not long enough or not constructive enough).
This member has similar concerns: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973949.msg10730750#msg10730750

[Quickseller]

Da dice just paid out their first week of payments and they were way under budget (had budgeted ~8 btc but spent less then 2 btc). You can probably move them to active.

I read they cut payments to a number of their posters claiming that they don't pay for "one liners", although there was no such thing in the rules. If any of you are planning to join think twice, because they may randomly decide that your posts are too short or not constructive enough.

If you are referring to yahoo's posts from last week, then I had reviewed the last three pages of his posting history and they were mostly spam. I am not sure why he was not banned during the last week for insubstantial posts+paid signature

IMO campaign operators need to do more to actually fight spam

No, it's not about yahoo. I meant these people who complained in the thread today about not getting full payment. I agree that managers should be strict, but they also should make the rules clear.
Dadice's current rules give them free choice to decide whether your posts qualify for payment or not and as a result nobody knows if their posts will end up being paid for. At the same time this allows the manager to cheat posters by cutting their payment by a small number every month and blaming it on whatever (like not long enough or not constructive enough).
This member has similar concerns: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973949.msg10730750#msg10730750

The post in question was not made in english so it would not have counted no matter how long it was. In the case of da dice, the campaign manager and the owner of the site are two different people so the incentive to keep costs in line are not there, all the campaign manager needs to worry about is that he does not go over budget which he accomplishes by not allowing more participants then if everyone made the max number of posts into the campaign. By not paying for spammy posts he will not attract spammers, leaving room for people who make higher quality posts, which will increase the overall effectiveness of the campaign

[bitgeek]

By not paying for spammy posts he will not attract spammers, leaving room for people who make higher quality posts, which will increase the overall effectiveness of the campaign

That's one problem. Whether the post is considered spammy or is only the manager's choice and the participants are not being told which of their posts were disqualified.
The other is the length of posts. If it was only about spam I wouldn't even start the argument, but it seems most posters were paid less than they should because their posts, according to the person who counted them, were too short. I guess that's it, we'll see how they do next week.

[EternalWingsofGod]

CryptoVPN doesn't have escrow, as Carra23 will be counting the posts of members and processing payments as well. I'll update the OP with the details of the signature campaign right now.

EDIT: Done.

CryptoVPN has made a couple of small changes to it's campaign.
Maximum post for the month has been dropped from 100 to 80
They will also make a half payment for members that can only make 40 posts for the months.

Those are some nifty changes. Updating the OP right now.
EDIT: Done.

Temporary change in offer for CryptoVPN change in effective post count for users this month so a note might be required

This month of march we will only require 30 for half and 60 for full just in case we get any late joiners this month.
April and any month onwards will have the requirement will go back to 40/80.

[redsn0w]

So it seems quite confirmed that redisn0w was incorrect about needing the phone number only for sign-up.  You do need it for withdrawal and other actions which means that finding an internet one-time sms wouldn't help.  Anyway, I don't know if it's worth it to put a note on your OP about the .5% fee and the telephone number for the bit-x campaign.

I have requested my bitcoins today, and I haven't put any "second" confirmation code. I have only put the first sms code when I have logged in the site.

[Mitchell]

EternalWingsOfGod, thank you very much for this update. Will edit the OP right now.
EDIT: Done.
Also, could you guys please move this stuff about the Bit-X login and verification stuff to the right thread? It's kinda off-topic in this one.

[SebastianJu]

By not paying for spammy posts he will not attract spammers, leaving room for people who make higher quality posts, which will increase the overall effectiveness of the campaign

That's one problem. Whether the post is considered spammy or is only the manager's choice and the participants are not being told which of their posts were disqualified.
The other is the length of posts. If it was only about spam I wouldn't even start the argument, but it seems most posters were paid less than they should because their posts, according to the person who counted them, were too short. I guess that's it, we'll see how they do next week.

So far most of the persons who asked didnt see that they posted most in threads that dont count and so on. The oneliner seems to be not a general rule too, it depends on the usefulness of oneliners written. So far i dont see that unfair payments were done. The manager explained to everyone too, which is quite some work. I think that way is better than a bot, since a bot can be gamed because of his fixed rules.

[Quickseller]

By not paying for spammy posts he will not attract spammers, leaving room for people who make higher quality posts, which will increase the overall effectiveness of the campaign

That's one problem. Whether the post is considered spammy or is only the manager's choice and the participants are not being told which of their posts were disqualified.
The other is the length of posts. If it was only about spam I wouldn't even start the argument, but it seems most posters were paid less than they should because their posts, according to the person who counted them, were too short. I guess that's it, we'll see how they do next week.

Well it seems to be your argument for the manager to pay for all posts despite their spam status, which is obviously not the solution. If you are making a lot of one liners then you are more likely to have few/none of your one liners paid for, while on the other hand if you have mostly posts that you put a lot of effort into then a very short post would be more likely to be paid out. Yes that is not treating everyone exactly the same when deciding when to pay a specific post however the one liner is more likely to be looked at closely if written by someone who has a reputation for putting effort into their posts verses someone who has likely made their ways to many people's ignore list for posting crap

[redsn0w]

By not paying for spammy posts he will not attract spammers, leaving room for people who make higher quality posts, which will increase the overall effectiveness of the campaign

That's one problem. Whether the post is considered spammy or is only the manager's choice and the participants are not being told which of their posts were disqualified.
The other is the length of posts. If it was only about spam I wouldn't even start the argument, but it seems most posters were paid less than they should because their posts, according to the person who counted them, were too short. I guess that's it, we'll see how they do next week.

Well it seems to be your argument for the manager to pay for all posts despite their spam status, which is obviously not the solution. If you are making a lot of one liners then you are more likely to have few/none of your one liners paid for, while on the other hand if you have mostly posts that you put a lot of effort into then a very short post would be more likely to be paid out. Yes that is not treating everyone exactly the same when deciding when to pay a specific post however the one liner is more likely to be looked at closely if written by someone who has a reputation for putting effort into their posts verses someone who has likely made their ways to many people's ignore list for posting crap

Yes of course, at the end each of use have a "different" meaning of the word spam. A online of post is not a real spam, it depends also of the time between a post and the other. There are different variable/factors and the manager make the sig. campaign rules (if someone don't like the rules " he can always leave").

[arallmuus]

By not paying for spammy posts he will not attract spammers, leaving room for people who make higher quality posts, which will increase the overall effectiveness of the campaign

That's one problem. Whether the post is considered spammy or is only the manager's choice and the participants are not being told which of their posts were disqualified.
The other is the length of posts. If it was only about spam I wouldn't even start the argument, but it seems most posters were paid less than they should because their posts, according to the person who counted them, were too short. I guess that's it, we'll see how they do next week.

Well it seems to be your argument for the manager to pay for all posts despite their spam status, which is obviously not the solution. If you are making a lot of one liners then you are more likely to have few/none of your one liners paid for, while on the other hand if you have mostly posts that you put a lot of effort into then a very short post would be more likely to be paid out. Yes that is not treating everyone exactly the same when deciding when to pay a specific post however the one liner is more likely to be looked at closely if written by someone who has a reputation for putting effort into their posts verses someone who has likely made their ways to many people's ignore list for posting crap

Yes of course, at the end each of use have a "different" meaning of the word spam. A online of post is not a real spam, it depends also of the time between a post and the other. There are different variable/factors and the manager make the sig. campaign rules (if someone don't like the rules " he can always leave").

Some one liners may not be considered as spammy post, but as always each signature campaign got its own manager, it will be due to the manager's opinion wether to consider some post a spammy post or not
Even a long post made by madness is considered spammy post, some signature campaign will even pay you for a short one liner spammy post, if one isnt satisfied with his current signature campaign , there is alot of choices to choose from

[irfan_pak10]

Bit-x has reduced its pay rates.

Where it is posted ? If it is some where please provide us the link, and dont post if you dont know about any thing. I think its the bug in the site and it will be corrected soon.

[Quickseller]

Bit-x has reduced its pay rates.

Where it is posted ? If it is some where please provide us the link, and dont post if you dont know about any thing. I think its the bug in the site and it will be corrected soon.

I have a feeling the person who posted that is Marcotheminer announcing the reduction. This is obviously speculation but it would make sense. I don't think you can edit your posts when you are banned.

[abyrnes81]

Bit-x has reduced its pay rates.

Where it is posted ? If it is some where please provide us the link, and dont post if you dont know about any thing. I think its the bug in the site and it will be corrected soon.

I have a feeling the person who posted that is Marcotheminer announcing the reduction. This is obviously speculation but it would make sense. I don't think you can edit your posts when you are banned.

Someone has said :

It shows fine for me(0.0014BTC). Could anyone please check it? Thank you!

   -MZ

Mine was also fine. If you spammed your rate was lowered ( Just a guess, but seems right ). I will talk to Marco now.

I don't know if this is true, but most probably he has right.