[ENDED] ChipMixer Signature Campaign | Sr Member+

[Little Mouse]

I don't think it should be changed although it depends on  ChipMixer. When the campaign had started, the price of bitcoin was around $2000 which is $300 a month. And when price pumped to 2017 ATH, it was about $3000 per month. Again BTC crashed to $3000 and the pay rate was still the same.
Why would now it be changed? From the very beginning, the campaign was paying in terms of BTC. When BTC crashed to $3000, I think ChipMixer wasn’t the highest paid campaign in term of USD value. It means ChipMixer has always considered 1 BTC = 1 BTC which should be now too.

[SiNeReiNZzz]

I think there is nothing more to discuss here.
For my part, I am happy for everyone who can be a part of this signature-campaign.
And I hope, that the amount of weekly payment for the participants, can stay as it is, for a long time.

Sure, I would also like to be part of it. Just like almost everyone of us.
But that's mostly why I'm talking like this.
Because if I were there, I would also hope and be happy about every day that there is no downward adjustment...

Do not begrudge the current members! Envy eats away your own soul 

[pooya87]

Pegging to fiat isn't a bad thing in times like these.

When the business is getting paid in bitcoin, pays in bitcoin, and works only with bitcoin and its revenue is not dependent on bitcoin price rise/fall, it makes no sense to measure things in fiat terms.

I've made this argument elsewhere about gambling sites but it also works with mixers and any other business that is always working purely with bitcoin, maybe more so for mixers since their customer count increases unlike gambling sites. Kinda like this forum's donator status still costing 10BTC.

With that said, I wouldn't be surprised if the rates were lowered at some point since we are still living in a fiat world where 1BTC is not 1BTC but is X$.

[asche]

Pegging to fiat isn't a bad thing in times like these.

When the business is getting paid in bitcoin, pays in bitcoin, and works only with bitcoin and its revenue is not dependent on bitcoin price rise/fall, it makes no sense to measure things in fiat terms.

I've made this argument elsewhere about gambling sites but it also works with mixers and any other business that is always working purely with bitcoin, maybe more so for mixers since their customer count increases unlike gambling sites. Kinda like this forum's donator status still costing 10BTC.

With that said, I wouldn't be surprised if the rates were lowered at some point since we are still living in a fiat world where 1BTC is not 1BTC but is X$.

You are right from the bitcoin business perspective, and even from the principle, because this is the way to go if you believe in actual goods with fixed bitcoin prices.

However it can definitely come with adverse effects when it comes to the campaign participants. Because I believe they do feel the difference, and do act differently depending on the bitcoin price. Hell if it didn't cross my mind how crazy rates are right now. And I'm from a high paying country, with a good paying job. Now think about someone from a country with very low revenues. They might earn in a week what a good paying job brings in a year. That brings some kind of pressure with it, isn't it?

[hilariousandco]

Pegging to fiat isn't a bad thing in times like these.

When the business is getting paid in bitcoin, pays in bitcoin, and works only with bitcoin and its revenue is not dependent on bitcoin price rise/fall, it makes no sense to measure things in fiat terms.

I've made this argument elsewhere about gambling sites but it also works with mixers and any other business that is always working purely with bitcoin, maybe more so for mixers since their customer count increases unlike gambling sites. Kinda like this forum's donator status still costing 10BTC.

With that said, I wouldn't be surprised if the rates were lowered at some point since we are still living in a fiat world where 1BTC is not 1BTC but is X$.

Of course it makes sense. It makes perfect sense so people don't end up getting paid something silly like 30± dollars per post nor do they get shortchanged if it falls. Just because a company gets paid in bitcoin, pays in bitcoin, and works only with bitcoin and its revenue is not dependent on bitcoin price rise/fall doesn't mean the value should stick to a fixed bitcoin price. There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying something like you get 5 dollars in bitcoin per post or whatever. The forum also deals only deals and pays in bitcoin but staff payments are capped in fiat amounts but are always paid in bitcoin. Its much safer and logical that way.

[Charles-Tim]

I just want to contribute about the weekly payment of this campaign, some people can be annoyed because the payment is high and wish for reduction, and most likely these people are not on this campaign, that is how human nature is, but if they are hired for this campaign, they will not think so. If there will be reduction in the weekly payment, we members are not concerned, only people that are concerned are the brain behind Chipmixer and the campaign manager, DarkStar. They have a representative that will negotiate this to DarkStar. DarkStar will be the one to declear appreciate changes to terms of payment or new campaign will be opened. So far Bitcointalk members are not the ones paying for this campaign, they need not to make any comment about the payment in my opinion.

[Dabs]

I tend to agree with 1 BTC = 1 BTC.

When the time comes that 1 BTC = $1m and ChipMixer is still around, and their pay structure has not changed, you can bet that all remaining participants will have the best quality posts in the entire forum, relative to all other signature campaigns. No one is going to risk getting delisted or removed.

Like what has been mentioned, if you want to be VIP here, donate 50 bitcoins. That's not changing (and maybe why no one has been donating recently.)

[hilariousandco]

I tend to agree with 1 BTC = 1 BTC.

True, but that doesn't mean the payments have to be fixed in bitcoin. There's absolutely nothing wrong in saying it's $1/3/5/10/30 per post in bitcoin, the payment is still in bitcoin after all. I think we can all agree that the current payment is quite ludicrous and can easily be avoided in future. If they still wanted to pay in a fixed bitcoin price they could still cap the total weekly amount you can get but paying in a fixed fiat amount would make more sense to me.

[Renampun]

*let me comment a little...
I also joined a signature campaign that pays satoshi based on the number of posts but as the price of Bitcoin increases, the nominal satoshi paid to each member decreases. but Chpmixer is different, from the start they will not reduce the amount of satoshi they pay/post because it doesn't burden their finances at all. lucky for all participants.

[AB de Royse777]

True, but that doesn't mean the payments have to be fixed in bitcoin. There's absolutely nothing wrong in saying it's $1/3/5/10/30 per post in bitcoin, the payment is still in bitcoin after all.

We still need years to get adopted with Bitcoin ecosystem. Take out $/fiat equation from the mind, it's easy. 1 BTC is 1 BTC. Imagine there are no fiat system, bitcoin is the currency. To buy a drink you are paying 0.000075 BTC, to buy a pack of cigarette you are paying 0.0003734 BTC, to buy a packet dinner you are paying 0.0009341 BTC.

I know it's not realistic now but maybe for Chipmixer - it's already a reality.

Why not embrace 1 BTC = 1 BTC?

[Dabs]

Once they use a value of any fiat currency, paid in bitcoin, then the post is no longer actually paid in bitcoin. It is paid in fiat, converted to bitcoin and sent through bitcoin as a payment channel. They could have just used PayPal as the value of the payment does not change in terms of fiat. Of course, no one here uses PayPal huh... (and if you do, you can just buy bitcoin now with it.)

[o_e_l_e_o]

The smallest chip has always been 0.001 BTC, and so the minimum you can donate from your chips has always been 0.001 BTC, regardless of that fiat price. Obviously you can donate more by sending a non-multiple of 0.001 BTC, but donating a chip or two is better for your privacy.

[JollyGood]

I agree with you in the sense that payments could (for any and all campaigns) be as $x per post but paid in Bitcoin if that is what is decided between the campaign manager and the team behind the project. I think with Bitcoin reaching new all time highs of $40,000+ the amount being paid out for campaigns would be extremely high unless they are fixed in USD$ but paid in Bitcoin.

If campaign participants are getting thousands of USD$ every month in this campaign then great for them but it seems almost inevitable at some point that paying out over BTC100 @ $40,000 which is around $4 million does not seem like it is the best usage of seeking promotion to their website. $4 million would be more than enough for a massive social media campaign and catchy television ads running in various languages in various countries across the globe.

Congratulations to all that have and still are participating in this campaign, from what I recall I applied twice but was not selected. Even if I had been, I think I would still have the same outlook about the payout system.

I tend to agree with 1 BTC = 1 BTC.

True, but that doesn't mean the payments have to be fixed in bitcoin. There's absolutely nothing wrong in saying it's $1/3/5/10/30 per post in bitcoin, the payment is still in bitcoin after all. I think we can all agree that the current payment is quite ludicrous and can easily be avoided in future. If they still wanted to pay in a fixed bitcoin price they could still cap the total weekly amount you can get but paying in a fixed fiat amount would make more sense to me.

[Pmalek]

I tend to agree with 1 BTC = 1 BTC.

I am always surprised when I hear people say this. I don't really think they believe it themselves, or they might think that way when it benefits them. If you think 1 BTC = 1 BTC, and it will always be 1 BTC, then the same logic should be used in situations that don't benefit you.

Let's make it easy and say that at one time in the past, you had to pay 1 BTC for a USB drive. We are going back to a time when 1 BTC = 1 USB drive.

Now fast forward to the present. You are saying that 1 BTC = 1 BTC (1 USB). Are you telling me that you are ready to pay a USB drive 1 BTC in 2021 because nothing has changed and 1 BTC will always be 1 BTC? If that is the case, I can make you a great deal and give you 50% off for each USB drive you buy from. So you are getting each USB drive for just 0.5 BTC! Imagine the profits you would make with this.

Let me know when you want to start.
That is why 1 bitcoin isn't always 1 bitcoin.

Having said all that, I hope the ChipMixer participants keep receiving the same weekly BTC rates if CM feels that is the way to go.
I am not even sure why the discussion about CM rates even started. Doesn't seem right to discuss it and give suggestions on how to lower payrates, and if and when that is going to happen. 

[Pearls Before Swine]

This isn't my boxing match, but why should Chipmixer campaigners get a reduction in payment?  They're for the most part the cream of the crop as far as bitcointalk members go, and sometimes you have to reward talent with a higher than normal compensation. 

Besides, bitcoin is down from its ATH significantly and if I had to wager a guess I would say that Chipmixer can well afford to keep the campaign going just as it is.

[examplens]

I tend to agree with 1 BTC = 1 BTC.

I am always surprised when I hear people say this. I don't really think they believe it themselves, or they might think that way when it benefits them. If you think 1 BTC = 1 BTC, and it will always be 1 BTC, then the same logic should be used in situations that don't benefit you.

Let's make it easy and say that at one time in the past, you had to pay 1 BTC for a USB drive. We are going back to a time when 1 BTC = 1 USB drive.

Just remember Laszlo Hanyecz well known as pizza guy which pay 10000Bitcoin for one pizza 10 yrs ago. 

[JollyGood]

It was two pizzas because he said he loved to eat left over pizza the next day  

This article is from around 8 months ago on CMC. it makes interesting reading since it is not the exact same recycled story from a decade ago but has other sides: https://blog.coinmarketcap.com/2020/05/23/meet-the-man-who-spent-10000-btc-on-two-pizzas/

I tend to agree with 1 BTC = 1 BTC.

I am always surprised when I hear people say this. I don't really think they believe it themselves, or they might think that way when it benefits them. If you think 1 BTC = 1 BTC, and it will always be 1 BTC, then the same logic should be used in situations that don't benefit you.

Let's make it easy and say that at one time in the past, you had to pay 1 BTC for a USB drive. We are going back to a time when 1 BTC = 1 USB drive.

Just remember Laszlo Hanyecz well known as pizza guy which pay 10000Bitcoin for one pizza 10 yrs ago.  

[Swordsoffreedom]

Let's take a look at the platforms we use regularly.
As a trader, I've to use Bitstamp, Binance, Bittrex every day. previously, their withdrawal fee was 0.0005 BTC, but it still remains unchanged after the increase in BTC price, I have to count 0.0005BTC~20usd per withdrawal, & no one has any objection about that.
As a gambler, I very often use online gambling platforms, most gambling websites have their withdrawal fees unchanged. For example, I can talk about "stake", even after the increase in the price of BTC, their withdrawal fee remains unchanged at 0.0001BTC~4usd, & I am satisfied with their service.
If I talk about ChipMixer, still the price of the smallest chip is 0.001BTC~35usd.

So, IMHO, I think they can reduce the rewards a little to handle this situation but it makes more sense that the rewards counting in BTC, not the equivalent USD value. For those who have been with ChipMixer from the beginning, Now it is a reward for their good job and hard work, they deserve it.

[pooya87]

I tend to agree with 1 BTC = 1 BTC.

I am always surprised when I hear people say this. I don't really think they believe it themselves, or they might think that way when it benefits them. If you think 1 BTC = 1 BTC, and it will always be 1 BTC, then the same logic should be used in situations that don't benefit you.

You are changing the context and yes in the context of exchanging bitcoin with something else it makes sense to talk about its value against that thing whether it is fiat or an object like a USB.
But in the purely bitcoin context, 1 BTC = 1 BTC. For example when price was $3,000 you were paying minimum of 1 s/vb and when price went up 10 times and reached $30,000 you are still paying minimum of 1 s/vb because 1 BTC = 1 BTC. And if you had 1 BTC that was worth $1 and wanted to mix it you still use 1 BTC, and if you had the same 1 BTC when it's worth $40k you still mix 1 BTC.

[Upgrade00]

I am always surprised when I hear people say this. I don't really think they believe it themselves, or they might think that way when it benefits them. If you think 1 BTC = 1 BTC, and it will always be 1 BTC, then the same logic should be used in situations that don't benefit you.

I think it's used to show that Bitcoin itself doesn't change, rather other currencies and assets changes against it. Let me try and use an analogy here;
Think of it like a world class resort located in a remote area or a really precious stone which few know about. Most people are not aware of them or their worth and as such it doesn't really have a value cause there's no market at the time.
After a while scientific research could be done on the stone or more potential buyers discover the resort and realize it's a modern building regardless of the location, their market audience starts to grow and so does the market value, but there always was the intrinsic value even when no one was paying attention.