Re: Updated Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns

[Juggy777]

New campaign has been appeared on the services section. The campaign is from orocoin. The thread is here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1738572.0 .

After completing the selection they have locked the thread which I think is not favorable.

As far as I can see the thread is not locked, this looks another self moderated thread users should be careful. Plus there's no mention of escrow of funds. For me it's difficult though my rank is not supported, but no escrow and campaign manager makes me not keen to recommend but let's see how it goes for the users in the future. Would suggest people to ask for escrow or wait until some one gets paid, and they should answer why It was locked and now unlocked.

[1715269218]

1715269218

[1715269218]

1715269218

[1715269218]

1715269218

[GregH37]

New campaign has been appeared on the services section. The campaign is from orocoin. The thread is here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1738572.0 .

After completing the selection they have locked the thread which I think is not favorable.

As far as I can see the thread is not locked, this looks another self moderated thread users should be careful. Plus there's no mention of escrow of funds. For me it's difficult though my rank is not supported, but no escrow and campaign manager makes me not keen to recommend but let's see how it goes for the users in the future. Would suggest people to ask for escrow or wait until some one gets paid, and they should answer why It was locked and now unlocked.

1: They locked thread first. but again unlocked for discussion purpose.
2: You must missed something. they are supporting Member Ranked users..
3: about escrow you are right. they don't have escrow and I saw when someone wasked about escrow they replied him that if he want escrow he can PM him.. lol.. looks like they'll use escrow for everyone individually if everyone ask. (means they don't even know how signature campaign escrows works)

Escrow?

PM me or Camosoul if you want to use escrow. Thanks.

[Juggy777]

New campaign has been appeared on the services section. The campaign is from orocoin. The thread is here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1738572.0 .

After completing the selection they have locked the thread which I think is not favorable.

As far as I can see the thread is not locked, this looks another self moderated thread users should be careful. Plus there's no mention of escrow of funds. For me it's difficult though my rank is not supported, but no escrow and campaign manager makes me not keen to recommend but let's see how it goes for the users in the future. Would suggest people to ask for escrow or wait until some one gets paid, and they should answer why It was locked and now unlocked.

1: They locked thread first. but again unlocked for discussion purpose.
2: You must missed something. they are supporting Member Ranked users..
3: about escrow you are right. they don't have escrow and I saw when someone wasked about escrow they replied him that if he want escrow he can PM him.. lol.. looks like they'll use escrow for everyone individually if everyone ask. (means they don't even know how signature campaign escrows works)

Escrow?

PM me or Camosoul if you want to use escrow. Thanks.

Ohh yaa, slipped it but wait a second did you check their rates that's 0.70 cents per post. What I can make in one month of signature campaign, I can make in a week there. In this high prices of btc how are they able to sustain it. I think this are the highest rates paid for members, it's tempting me no doubt but the individual escrow part is not enough for me till they actually do it. Will keep a watch for the future, till then I would suggest existing campaigners to wait. To Early to leave and join that campaign.

[Superzpay]

New campaign has been appeared on the services section. The campaign is from orocoin. The thread is here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1738572.0 .

After completing the selection they have locked the thread which I think is not favorable.

As far as I can see the thread is not locked, this looks another self moderated thread users should be careful. Plus there's no mention of escrow of funds. For me it's difficult though my rank is not supported, but no escrow and campaign manager makes me not keen to recommend but let's see how it goes for the users in the future. Would suggest people to ask for escrow or wait until some one gets paid, and they should answer why It was locked and now unlocked.

1: They locked thread first. but again unlocked for discussion purpose.
2: You must missed something. they are supporting Member Ranked users..
3: about escrow you are right. they don't have escrow and I saw when someone wasked about escrow they replied him that if he want escrow he can PM him.. lol.. looks like they'll use escrow for everyone individually if everyone ask. (means they don't even know how signature campaign escrows works)

Escrow?

PM me or Camosoul if you want to use escrow. Thanks.

From their words about escrow I think they do not know about escrow and do not know that how the escrow for a signature campaign work. They have to contact an expert signature campaign manager.

[Fatanut]

New campaign has been appeared on the services section. The campaign is from orocoin. The thread is here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1738572.0 .

After completing the selection they have locked the thread which I think is not favorable.

To be honest, I don't know how this campaign has become full in just a matter of less than 2 hours. I'd say the manager isn't as picky as other managers. It'd be really efficient for both ends (the manager and the users) if they would accept your offer to do escrow. People are doubtful of new ICOs because of the previous campaigns that scammed people especially this campaign is running for 2 weeks before they can confirm payment. 2 weeks of free advertising is more than enough for scammers.
http://paste.ee/r/Irvrr Updated table on OP.

[Lauda]

To be honest, I don't know how this campaign has become full in just a matter of less than 2 hours. I'd say the manager isn't as picky as other managers. It'd be really efficient for both ends (the manager and the users) if they would accept your offer to do escrow. People are doubtful of new ICOs because of the previous campaigns that scammed people especially this campaign is running for 2 weeks before they can confirm payment. 2 weeks of free advertising is more than enough for scammers.

They have probably spent zero (or extremely little amount of) effort in evaluating the candidates. This is the next campaign that is indirectly facilitating spam on this forum.
What do people think about adding a SMAS column as well, i.e. whether the campaign uses the blacklist? The BTCT account price estimator already uses it as well. I'm certain that there are some *cons* to this idea and that spammers / farmers will hate the thought of it, but I figured I'd just throw it out there.

[Lutpin]

What do people think about adding a SMAS column as well, i.e. whether the campaign uses the blacklist? The BTCT account price estimator already uses it as well. I'm certain that there are some *cons* to this idea and that spammers / farmers will hate the thought of it, but I figured I'd just throw it out there.

As this thread was linked in the SMAS thread to show how "all" campaigns rely on SMAS now, I agree it would be worth pointing out whether or not a campaign supports SMAS.
We could do that either with an additional column, or with some color coding (for example: (Lime)green -> SMAS camapaign; Yellow -> Uses the SMAS list; Blue/black -> No status).

Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns

|     Advertisement     |

Chain-Bet.com
Win 16x | 0% House Edge | On Chain | Provably Fair

This spot has been rented by Bitcoin Gambling until 15-01-2017. Advertise here
Advertised sites, items, etc are not endorsed and may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.

The following abbreviations will be used for campaigns (where applicable):

Campaigns:
Active	||	Currently active
PNYC	||	Payment not yet confirmed
FLUX	||	Campaign in flux between closed and accepting
CFNP	||	Closed for new participants
Term:				Ranks:
p/d	||	post/daily		L	||	Legendary Member
p/w	||	post/weekly		H	||	Hero Member
p/m	||	post/monthly		S	||	Senior Member
f/w	||	fixed/weekly		F	||	Full Member
f/m	||	fixed/monthly		M	||	Member
				J	||	Junior
				N	||	Newbie

All Bitcoin Signature Campaigns

Active

|

Campaign

|

Term

|

L

|

H

|

S

|

F

|

M

|

J

|

N

|

Min

|

Max

|

Escrow

|

|

777Coin

|

p/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

.00017

|

.00012

|

.00006

|

x

|

20/w

|

80/w

|

Y/N

|

|

BitDouble.io

|

f/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

x

|

x

|

5/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Bitmixer.io

|

p/w

|

.0007

|

.0007

|

.0007

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

.035BTC

|

N

|

|

Bitvest

|

p/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

.00021

|

.00011

|

.00006

|

x

|

20/w

|

75/w

|

Y/N

|

|

Coinroll*

|

p/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

N

|

|

NitrogenSports

|

p/w

|

.0006

|

.0005

|

.0004

|

.0003

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

10/w

|

25/w

|

Y/N

|

|

Secondstrade

|

p/w

|

.00031

|

.00029

|

.00023

|

.00019

|

.00006

|

.00004

|

x

|

10/w

|

35/w

|

N

|

PNYC

|

Campaign

|

Term

|

L

|

H

|

S

|

F

|

M

|

J

|

N

|

Min

|

Max

|

Escrow

|

|

OroCoin

|

p/2w

|

.0012

|

.0012

|

.0008

|

.00065

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

10/w

|

30/w

|

N

|

|

XBTFreelancer

|

p/w

|

.0006

|

.0006

|

.0006

|

.0005

|

.00012

|

x

|

x

|

20/w

|

30/w

|

Y

|

FLUX

|

Campaign

|

Term

|

L

|

H

|

S

|

F

|

M

|

J

|

N

|

Min

|

Max

|

Escrow

|

|

Betcoin.ag*

|

p/m

|

.00115

|

.001

|

.0008

|

.0005

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/m

|

100/m

|

N

|

|

WhyFuture

|

p/w

|

.00032

|

.00032

|

.00027

|

.0002

|

.00012

|

.00006

|

.00005

|

15/w

|

45/w

|

Y

|

CFNP

|

Campaign

|

Term

|

L

|

H

|

S

|

F

|

M

|

J

|

N

|

Min

|

Max

|

Escrow

|

|

1XBIT

|

f/w

|

.04

|

.04

|

.03

|

.02

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

BitBlender

|

f/w

|

.04

|

.035

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

25/w

|

x

|

Y/N

|

|

Bitcoin.com

|

**/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

N

|

|

BitConnect

|

p/w

|

.0011

|

.0011

|

.0008

|

.00065

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

10/w

|

30/w

|

Y/N

|

|

BitDice

|

f/w

|

.045

|

.045

|

.035

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Bitsane

|

f/w

|

.035

|

.035

|

.022

|

.015

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Bitsler

|

p/w

|

.0015

|

.0014

|

.00133

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

1/w

|

30/w

|

N

|

|

Crypto-Games

|

f/w

|

.037

|

.035

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

25/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Crypto-News

|

f/w

|

.037

|

.035

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

25/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Cryptomixer

|

p/w

|

.00115

|

.00115

|

.00115

|

.00115

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

N

|

|

Flash

|

f/w

|

.008

|

.008

|

.007

|

.005

|

.004

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

FortuneJack

|

f/w

|

.04

|

.04

|

.04

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Liqui Exchange

|

p/w

|

.00085

|

.00075

|

.00065

|

.00055

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

1/m

|

7/d

|

N

|

|

Rollin.io

|

f/m

|

.080

|

.080

|

.055

|

.030

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

50/m

|

x

|

N

|

|

Sportsbet.io

|

f/w

|

.04

|

.04

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

Y/N

|

|

YoBit.net

|

p/d

|

.00030

|

.00030

|

.00030

|

.00020

|

.00013

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

20/d

|

N

|

* means that the campaign is currently having some trouble. Joining is not recommend.
** means that there are some special conditions. Please see the campaigns thread for more information.


Yes/No explanationIf a campaign has Yes/No as escrow status, it means that the person holding the funds also manages the campaign. This is a conflict of interest, but shouldn't be a big problem if the person doing escrow is trusted.

Code:

05-Jan-2017: Added Orocoin
04-Jan-2017: Moved Crypto-Games, Added Red Asterisk on Coinroll
02-Jan-2017: Moved 1XBIT, Moved Bitcoin.com, Moved Rollin.io, Updated Secondstrade, Updated Crypto-Games, Moved Crypto-Games, Updated Crypto-News
01-Jan-2017: Added XBTFreelancer, Removed Crazybtrade, Removed Spectre PPP

[damar09]

What do people think about adding a SMAS column as well, i.e. whether the campaign uses the blacklist? The BTCT account price estimator already uses it as well. I'm certain that there are some *cons* to this idea and that spammers / farmers will hate the thought of it, but I figured I'd just throw it out there.

As this thread was linked in the SMAS thread to show how "all" campaigns rely on SMAS now, I agree it would be worth pointing out whether or not a campaign supports SMAS.
We could do that either with an additional column, or with some color coding (for example: (Lime)green -> SMAS camapaign; Yellow -> Uses the SMAS list; Blue/black -> No status).

Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns

|     Advertisement     |

Chain-Bet.com
Win 16x | 0% House Edge | On Chain | Provably Fair

This spot has been rented by Bitcoin Gambling until 15-01-2017. Advertise here
Advertised sites, items, etc are not endorsed and may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.

The following abbreviations will be used for campaigns (where applicable):

Campaigns:
Active	||	Currently active
PNYC	||	Payment not yet confirmed
FLUX	||	Campaign in flux between closed and accepting
CFNP	||	Closed for new participants
Term:				Ranks:
p/d	||	post/daily		L	||	Legendary Member
p/w	||	post/weekly		H	||	Hero Member
p/m	||	post/monthly		S	||	Senior Member
f/w	||	fixed/weekly		F	||	Full Member
f/m	||	fixed/monthly		M	||	Member
				J	||	Junior
				N	||	Newbie

All Bitcoin Signature Campaigns

Active

|

Campaign

|

Term

|

L

|

H

|

S

|

F

|

M

|

J

|

N

|

Min

|

Max

|

Escrow

|

|

777Coin

|

p/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

.00017

|

.00012

|

.00006

|

x

|

20/w

|

80/w

|

Y/N

|

|

BitDouble.io

|

f/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

x

|

x

|

5/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Bitmixer.io

|

p/w

|

.0007

|

.0007

|

.0007

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

.035BTC

|

N

|

|

Bitvest

|

p/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

.00021

|

.00011

|

.00006

|

x

|

20/w

|

75/w

|

Y/N

|

|

Coinroll*

|

p/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

N

|

|

NitrogenSports

|

p/w

|

.0006

|

.0005

|

.0004

|

.0003

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

10/w

|

25/w

|

Y/N

|

|

Secondstrade

|

p/w

|

.00031

|

.00029

|

.00023

|

.00019

|

.00006

|

.00004

|

x

|

10/w

|

35/w

|

N

|

PNYC

|

Campaign

|

Term

|

L

|

H

|

S

|

F

|

M

|

J

|

N

|

Min

|

Max

|

Escrow

|

|

OroCoin

|

p/2w

|

.0012

|

.0012

|

.0008

|

.00065

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

10/w

|

30/w

|

N

|

|

XBTFreelancer

|

p/w

|

.0006

|

.0006

|

.0006

|

.0005

|

.00012

|

x

|

x

|

20/w

|

30/w

|

Y

|

FLUX

|

Campaign

|

Term

|

L

|

H

|

S

|

F

|

M

|

J

|

N

|

Min

|

Max

|

Escrow

|

|

Betcoin.ag*

|

p/m

|

.00115

|

.001

|

.0008

|

.0005

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/m

|

100/m

|

N

|

|

WhyFuture

|

p/w

|

.00032

|

.00032

|

.00027

|

.0002

|

.00012

|

.00006

|

.00005

|

15/w

|

45/w

|

Y

|

CFNP

|

Campaign

|

Term

|

L

|

H

|

S

|

F

|

M

|

J

|

N

|

Min

|

Max

|

Escrow

|

|

1XBIT

|

f/w

|

.04

|

.04

|

.03

|

.02

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

BitBlender

|

f/w

|

.04

|

.035

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

25/w

|

x

|

Y/N

|

|

Bitcoin.com

|

**/w

|

**

|

**

|

**

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

N

|

|

BitConnect

|

p/w

|

.0011

|

.0011

|

.0008

|

.00065

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

10/w

|

30/w

|

Y/N

|

|

BitDice

|

f/w

|

.045

|

.045

|

.035

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Bitsane

|

f/w

|

.035

|

.035

|

.022

|

.015

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Bitsler

|

p/w

|

.0015

|

.0014

|

.00133

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

1/w

|

30/w

|

N

|

|

Crypto-Games

|

f/w

|

.037

|

.035

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

25/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Crypto-News

|

f/w

|

.037

|

.035

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

25/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Cryptomixer

|

p/w

|

.00115

|

.00115

|

.00115

|

.00115

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

N

|

|

Flash

|

f/w

|

.008

|

.008

|

.007

|

.005

|

.004

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

FortuneJack

|

f/w

|

.04

|

.04

|

.04

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

N

|

|

Liqui Exchange

|

p/w

|

.00085

|

.00075

|

.00065

|

.00055

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

1/m

|

7/d

|

N

|

|

Rollin.io

|

f/m

|

.080

|

.080

|

.055

|

.030

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

50/m

|

x

|

N

|

|

Sportsbet.io

|

f/w

|

.04

|

.04

|

.03

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

30/w

|

x

|

Y/N

|

|

YoBit.net

|

p/d

|

.00030

|

.00030

|

.00030

|

.00020

|

.00013

|

x

|

x

|

x

|

20/d

|

N

|

* means that the campaign is currently having some trouble. Joining is not recommend.
** means that there are some special conditions. Please see the campaigns thread for more information.


Yes/No explanationIf a campaign has Yes/No as escrow status, it means that the person holding the funds also manages the campaign. This is a conflict of interest, but shouldn't be a big problem if the person doing escrow is trusted.

Code:

05-Jan-2017: Added Orocoin
04-Jan-2017: Moved Crypto-Games, Added Red Asterisk on Coinroll
02-Jan-2017: Moved 1XBIT, Moved Bitcoin.com, Moved Rollin.io, Updated Secondstrade, Updated Crypto-Games, Moved Crypto-Games, Updated Crypto-News
01-Jan-2017: Added XBTFreelancer, Removed Crazybtrade, Removed Spectre PPP

for registration bitvest whether there are slots still exist, for the full member?

[Fatanut]

What do people think about adding a SMAS column as well, i.e. whether the campaign uses the blacklist? The BTCT account price estimator already uses it as well. I'm certain that there are some *cons* to this idea and that spammers / farmers will hate the thought of it, but I figured I'd just throw it out there.

As this thread was linked in the SMAS thread to show how "all" campaigns rely on SMAS now, I agree it would be worth pointing out whether or not a campaign supports SMAS.
We could do that either with an additional column, or with some color coding (for example: (Lime)green -> SMAS camapaign; Yellow -> Uses the SMAS list; Blue/black -> No status).

The color coding is such a useful idea that it can be used for other things as well like (a.) Warning for likely scam in PNYC (b.) Color assignment for different campaign managers; no color if there's no hired manager.

[shorena]

What do people think about adding a SMAS column as well, i.e. whether the campaign uses the blacklist? The BTCT account price estimator already uses it as well. I'm certain that there are some *cons* to this idea and that spammers / farmers will hate the thought of it, but I figured I'd just throw it out there.

As this thread was linked in the SMAS thread to show how "all" campaigns rely on SMAS now, I agree it would be worth pointing out whether or not a campaign supports SMAS.
We could do that either with an additional column, or with some color coding (for example: (Lime)green -> SMAS camapaign; Yellow -> Uses the SMAS list; Blue/black -> No status).

The color coding is such a useful idea that it can be used for other things as well like (a.) Warning for likely scam in PNYC (b.) Color assignment for different campaign managers; no color if there's no hired manager.

Do we really need to cram more information into the table? This is supposed to be an overview, which is why the detailed section was removed. SMAS or not is IMHO something for a detailed section, possible participants probably dont care about SMAS strong enough for it to be an initial indicator anyway, so it would be enough to know about it once they review the campaign thread. We already have a warning indicator, the red asterisk. The campaign manager is also only one click away should anyone care strongly about them.

[Your Point Is Invalid]

What do people think about adding a SMAS column as well, i.e. whether the campaign uses the blacklist? The BTCT account price estimator already uses it as well. I'm certain that there are some *cons* to this idea and that spammers / farmers will hate the thought of it, but I figured I'd just throw it out there.

As this thread was linked in the SMAS thread to show how "all" campaigns rely on SMAS now, I agree it would be worth pointing out whether or not a campaign supports SMAS.
We could do that either with an additional column, or with some color coding (for example: (Lime)green -> SMAS camapaign; Yellow -> Uses the SMAS list; Blue/black -> No status).

The color coding is such a useful idea that it can be used for other things as well like (a.) Warning for likely scam in PNYC (b.) Color assignment for different campaign managers; no color if there's no hired manager.

The SMAS thing is a waste of time, most users dont know what SMAS is and the rest dont care if a campaign uses it or not

[InvoKing]

What do people think about adding a SMAS column as well, i.e. whether the campaign uses the blacklist?

This will help the spammers a lot, they can pick easily the best non-SMAS campaigns to join without being worried about the rejection of their candidacy
Definitely NO. (even that i don't agree 100% about the way some /1/ manager throw away the names there and neglect to answer - to be more precise his name doesn't start with L)

[Mitchell]

I agree with shorena on this matter, but I'm always willing to do a vote.

[yhlsqj]

What do people think about adding a SMAS column as well, i.e. whether the campaign uses the blacklist?

This will help the spammers a lot, they can pick easily the best non-SMAS campaigns to join without being worried about the rejection of their candidacy
Definitely NO. (even that i don't agree 100% about the way some /1/ manager throw away the names there and neglect to answer - to be more precise his name doesn't start with L)

You are right, spammers will avoid to join those SMAS campaigns and go to sign up for non-smas campaigns, it is benefiting them actually(they save time to join strict campaign due to signs of smas). At least we should waste their time on signing up good campaigns with smas

[Lauda]

The color coding is such a useful idea that it can be used for other things as well like (a.) Warning for likely scam in PNYC (b.) Color assignment for different campaign managers; no color if there's no hired manager.

Indeed. I've been using it for a while in the [User Generated] - Known alts of anyone thread. There are plenty of options to save space by using colors.

Do we really need to cram more information into the table? This is supposed to be an overview, which is why the detailed section was removed.

I don't see why not if the information is useful (not saying that this would be).

This will help the spammers a lot, they can pick easily the best non-SMAS campaigns to join without being worried about the rejection of their candidacy
Definitely NO.

Fair point. I just wanted to see what the others thought about it and it seems that it isn't a good idea. Time to forget about it.

[shorena]

-snip-

Do we really need to cram more information into the table? This is supposed to be an overview, which is why the detailed section was removed.

I don't see why not if the information is useful (not saying that this would be).
-snip-

Because it adds another dimension to the table which makes it more complex. I also argued that the information is only useful to a small subset of posters. We are catering at posters here after all. Why does it matter whether or not the campaign uses SMAS or not?

[Lauda]

Because it adds another dimension to the table which makes it more complex.

I find the current table rather very simple.

I also argued that the information is only useful to a small subset of posters. We are catering at posters here after all. Why does it matter whether or not the campaign uses SMAS or not?

I have not tried arguing that the addition of a 'SMAS tag' would be useful (read the end of my response). I've actually accepted that it would most likely not be a good idea (based on the responses).

[Fatanut]

Because it adds another dimension to the table which makes it more complex.

I find the current table rather very simple.

Maybe just use the color coding for a different purpose. Just a suggestion, we can list all the campaigns alphabetically and then use the color coding to indicate the campaign's status (Full, PNYC, Active, FLUX) rather than categorizing them. It would look nice IMO.

[Vikingr]

OROCoin signature campaign is also open for Member ranks and the payment for members are the same as full members while you have not mentioned it in the table. You can see in the quote below from their campaign:

I am handling the signature and avatar campaign for Orocoin. We are looking for maximum of 25 participants for this campaign of which 10 will be members and full members, 10 will be senior members and 5 will be hero or legendary members.

Earnings

Members and Full members: 0.00065 BTC/Post
Sr. members: 0.0008 BTC/Post
Hero/Legendary members: 0.0012 BTC/Post

[Fatanut]

OROCoin signature campaign is also open for Member ranks and the payment for members are the same as full members while you have not mentioned it in the table. You can see in the quote below from their campaign:
-snip-

I must've missed it. Thanks!