[PrimeDice] (Staff Only) Earn Bitcoins Simply By Posting

[DubFX]

I don't agree with models above me at all well i kind of do, but members should have limited posts to low number as it's easy to get activity for member rank and then spam whole forum...

I used the multipliers as a base line you could easily lower it if you want start with a 1.5 default instead of 2

Kept it at 100 as the base since that is what Stunna set it at so 2 was the multiplier that would keep it at the rate.
Member = 60 Activity = 60 posts per week * 4 = 240/month * 1.5 =  Max 360 posts a month Min 50 = 12 Posts a Day = 0.0004/post
Maximum = 0.144/Month --> 0.15
Full Member 120 Activity = 120 posts per week * 4 = 480/month *1.5  = Max 720 Posts a Month Min 50 = 24 Posts a Day = 0.0006/post
Maximum =  0.4372/Month ---> 0.45
Etc.

360 posts for a member is still TOO mutch i would limit it to 100-150 or i don't know...otherwise i think i agree with the other ones and maybe lower the multipler by a point/few points.

[galbros]

This is an interesting question and good discussion.  I've been increasingly worried that users posting mainly to be posting would kill the golden goose that has been stunna's signature campaign.  I think a good acid test is that if you would not be posting if it wasn't for the .001 or so btc you were going to get from stunna the post probably isn't very high quality.

I agree mostly with shorena but think maybe something like declining rates per post might work though a limit is a lot easier.  It may also make sense to not count posts in this thread (presumably everyone here knows about primedice) and in off topic which is full of posts I can't imagine anyone ever reading.

One advantage of weekly payouts would be that it would reduce the incentive for those who want to post a lot to buy or build sock puppet accounts.

Also the addition of a referral system would allow tracking to see how well this campaign works.

The problem is how to balance the campaign without overloading stunna as I think hiring someone to monitor this would cause even more headaches.  Given the huge number of users who are now in this campaign anything is liable to be logistically difficult.  Maybe not allow automated signups and have some vetting on the front end rather than trying to check scores of accounts and thousands of posts on the back end.

Good Luck.

[bigasic]

Do we have to post here to complete the registration? Thats what I get from the campaign page, if not, let me know..

Starting this campaign with 446 posts.

[keithers]

All the above ideas are interesting, but at the end of the day, it is Stunna that is obviously paying everyone, and if it is profitable the way it is, why should we re-invent the wheel?

I think we can all agree that it is the best signature campaign, which is why we are all part of it...I don't think there is anything wrong leaving it the way that it is...

[philipma1957]

All the above ideas are interesting, but at the end of the day, it is Stunna that is obviously paying everyone, and if it is profitable the way it is, why should we re-invent the wheel?

I think we can all agree that it is the best signature campaign, which is why we are all part of it...I don't think there is anything wrong leaving it the way that it is...

Well  he asked us to give him some ideas .   So that is what we are doing.

  I for one think he is close to correct with 400 post monthly limit  but think 125 in a week 400 post max is better.
  
I think monthly payment should remain.  Not weekly.  I wnat it to be easy for him to do this not hard.


  Lastly he should cap membership to 100 or less.

 Assuming we are at under 100  people right now.  

 If we are at 100 to 130  he should cap at 150.

I Did a full number count

I get about 123 as of this post from stunna below

 basically he needs to keep some limits .   this is from this post.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=291387.msg7421598#msg7421598

125 a week  with 400 max monthly and 150 members  or maybe 175 members   but caps are needed.

001) devthedev
002) boumalo
003) DubFX
004) nwfella
005) TwinWinNerD
006) onlinepro
007) lynn402
008) keithers
009) saif92
010) cooldgamer
011) Don007
012) ljudotina
013) MICRO
014) turtlehurricane
015) wachtwoord
016) bitgeek
017) u9y42
020) marnem
021) IamCANADIAN013
022) Harley997
023) d2dtk
024) alexrossi
025) azguard
026 )Skoupi
027) koshgel
028) forever21
029) Amph
030) madmat
031) hdbuck
032) Ashbite
033) Parazyd
034) Sniar
035) Gianluca95
036) dnaleor
037) gondel
038) CaptainBeck
039) rohnearner
040) ObscureBean
041) deisik
042) shorena
043) Beymond
044) MoneyGod
045) 1211
046) justin00
047) MajidBC
048) hilariousandco
049) innocent93
050) Cranky4u
051) zcxvbs
052) deadley
053) ajareselde
054) grolll
055) sydboy
056) Musent
057) ethought
058) djjacket
059) LaudaM
060) Nerazzura
061) sameev29
062) philipma1957
063) zhinkk
064) lihuajkl
065) pandacoin
066) Equate
067) AuroraHF
068) mprep
069) ReRunRod
070) golikcoin
071) niothor
072) Acidyo
073) androz
074) Chris001
075) leex1528
076) mladen00
077) zahra4571
078) skele
079) beetcoin
080) okthen
081) mdzedzej
0820 iopq
083) byt411
084) WhiteShum
085) counter
086) nahtnam
087) moreia
088) snaildvorak
089) lyth0s
090) cxboyminer
091) Anon39
092) omahapoker
093) bcmine
094) makebitcoin
095) BRADLEYPLOOF
096) Ron~Popeil
097) Gladdy
098) bitmaster111
099) acs267
100) hoian0809
101) DrG
102) oppahdoggystyle
103) poordeveloper
104) iawgoM
105) pinksheep
106) AcoinL.L.C
107) "    noviapriani"
108) noviapriani
109) bryant.coleman
110) Cryptopher
111) Malin Keshar
112) Bit_Happy
113) animalroam
114) icey
115) Mythul
116) cech4204a
117) ShakyhandsBTCer
118) newIndia
119) galbros
120) freedomno1
121) lottoitaliano
122) helloge
123) tonykay

[acs267]

I think it's up to Stunna to decide.

However, why would he have a fixed number for every rank? The more posts a Senior and Hero has, the more money out of his pocket. Well doesn't benefit him much.

We should just stick with 100/wk.

It would benefit him more if he capped the users allowed than allowing higher ranks to post more. :/

[AcoinL.L.C]

A tad annoying that he changed rules a few days after re-enrollment, but he is paying us to post. I've already posted 71 (now 72) times since re-enrolling, however actual post count is closer to 50. Last session I was only enrolled for a few days, 67 total posts but my actual post count (which is what I supplied) was 55. I think the issue is that there are to many people in this program, and no offense to Hero members, but are Hero members posts really worth 3x as much as a members post? Or 2x as much as a Full Member? I can see a Hero member being worth 2x as much as a member, and 1.5x as much as a Full member, and Senior member being 1.25x the value of a full member, and 1.75x the value of a member. A full member should be ~1.2x that of a member

I likely will not be re-enrolling with this program next month if the current set up is the same, the limits are a bit brutal. Thats a lot of ad space.

Infact, Jr. Members are being paid more than members ina new campaign which also offers weekly payout.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=645147.0

Given, they only allow 100 posts a week to, and are limited to 25 members. I think you (stunna) should look and see who posts in what categories, that way you have your ad's in every section of the forum, I sometimes search a thread and than see every post is a Primedice signature. I think its currently an ineffecient beast to deal with.

Thanks for offering such a way to earn BTC while doing a hobby

[Parazyd]

I don't see why you wanna cut out members. It's better for Stunna that more people are in the campaign. How can't you see it?
More people = more sigs = more traffic.

[BadBear]

Because limiting posts will be useless, people will just use multiple accounts. There's already multiple prime dice participants asking about whether the forum allows multiple accounts for their "friends". Convenient timing eh?

[Justin00]

Becuase when he is paying people for 1 line shit its useless to his bank balance when people do not read it.
The more and more people use these signatures and other campaigns the more people will block seeing signatures, so less traffic overall.

No joke I saw this 2 days ago. Someone posted a thread. no other comments just OP. The dickface forgot to change to his alt account, and said something like "yeah yeah I totally agree"... so basically he was trying to have a convo with himself using 2 accounts, to increase post count, but was to stupid to even do that properly.

Anyways leave it open to just hero members I say We've earn't it. Rest of the time for other people will come.
besides how hard is it to create 10 member accounts ? compared to say 10 hero accounts ? if people were to make alts. thus hero accounts is safer to payout

I don't see why you wanna cut out members. It's better for Stunna that more people are in the campaign. How can't you see it?
More people = more sigs = more traffic.

[Mythul]

I've received the payment yesterday. Thank you again.

[ObscureBean]

Do the same as TF did. Pay out a fixed amount per month based on your activity points you have as long as you have a minimum of 50 posts per month (to filter non-active members).

So payments is:

iff minimum 50 posts: X * activity
else: 0

where X is a number you'r comfortable with (I would suggest somewhere between 0.0005 and 0.001)

Yeah, that sounds good!
Because it would double my payment per post

But seriously, this is the best idea I have seen in this thread!

Personally I don't think that is a good idea. If somebody posts his 50 minimum in 5 days, that means he can stay inactive for the rest of the month and still get paid. Meanwhile the posts he would've made would have been drowned by newer posts. If his posts are pages deep, then there is no visibility and is of no use to Stunna.

[deisik]

I think the issue is that there are to many people in this program, and no offense to Hero members, but are Hero members posts really worth 3x as much as a members post? Or 2x as much as a Full Member? I can see a Hero member being worth 2x as much as a member, and 1.5x as much as a Full member, and Senior member being 1.25x the value of a full member, and 1.75x the value of a member

It is not because of post content worthiness as such (actually, at all), it is because signatures are different between them all (Members vs Full Members and so on). And this is not just Stunna's whimsy (reminding to everyone)...

[Bit_Happy]

Because limiting posts will be useless, people will just use multiple accounts. There's already multiple prime dice participants asking about whether the forum allows multiple accounts for their "friends". Convenient timing eh?

The sock puppet union wants fair wages?  
I have never wanted to juggle multiple accounts but I'm sure some people do.

Here is the most important idea:
Bitcoin is an amazing project, so everyone should be able to generate decent quality posts if they put out some effort.

[gondel]

HI,
The campaign should be limited to only sr and hero members!
This is the only way to stop  spamming and non constructive posts!
If this campaign is limited to only 100 posts per week and also not weekly paid may be I will jump to another one.
BR
Gondel

[ObscureBean]

My point is that if someone posts more (like Hilarious or Bryant), it doesn't necessarily imply that they are spamming (break the "spam limit" in your speak). Some people may and do spend here most part of their day, make friends here (and enemies too, lol), actually they live on the forum. This doesn't in the least mean that they are evil spammers or worthless contributors...

Fair point some of the larger posters are useful contributors and not considered spam Stunna did say 9/10
The question is how to incorporate those type of posters into an exception list if they are capable of making quality posts and still pass the limit at the same time.

The spam has been a major issue for a while, anyone have some sort of suggestion on what they feel fair pricing is per rank?

Posts based on Activity is already being done a progressive scale could be added to it

Group   Requirement
Brand New   0 posts
Newbie   (none)
Jr. Member   activity: 30
Member   activity: 60
Full Member   activity: 120
Sr. Member   activity: 240
Hero Member activity: 480

Current 100 Posts Flat a week = 14/Day

Newbie = 14 Activity = 14 posts a week * 4 = 56/month ---> * 2 = Max 120 Posts a Month Min 50 = 4 Posts a Day
Jr Member = 30 Activity = 30 posts a week * 4 = 120/month * 2  = Max 240 Posts a Month Min 50 = 8 Posts a Day
Member = 60 Activity = 60 posts per week * 4 = 240/month * 2 =  Max 480 posts a month Min 50 = 16 Posts a Day
Full Member 120 Activity = 120 posts per week * 4 = 480/month *1.5  = Max 720 Posts a Month Min 50 = 24 Posts a Day
Sr Member 240 Activity = 240 posts per week * 4 = 960/month *1 = Max 960 Posts a Month Min 50 = 32 Posts a Day
Hero Member 480 Activity = 480 Posts per week * 4 = 1920/month * 0.6 = Max 1440 Posts a Month Min 50 posts = 48 Posts a Day

Simple system instead of a flat average as your around in the forum the more posts and more knowledge you have on average and a multiplier that changes the rate appropriately before becoming a divider to keep the max posts from getting to high.

Would factor in Bryant and Hillarious not sure who else would get close to that limit but it probably wouldn't be reached often otherwise it would need to be reanalyzed.

It pushes the old limit of 5000 to 1500 so a fairly conservative cut.  

That said those who abuse the system will be caught pretty fast using it so don't think the top end will be met often.

Per rank posting could also go by a post total as well.

Existing posts:
100-200: 0.02 or 0.04 BTC / 30 days Min Posts 50/month
201-400: 0.04 or 0.08 BTC / 30 days Min Posts 50/month
401-700: 0.06 or 0.12 BTC / 30 days (activity must be more than 60) Min Posts 50/month
701-1100: 0.08 or 0.16 BTC / 30 days (activity must be more than 120) Min Posts 50/month
1101-1800: 0.1 or 0.2 BTC / 30 days (activity must be more than 180) Min Posts 50/month
1801-2500: 0.12 or 0.24 BTC / 30 days (activity must be more than 240) Min Posts 50/month
2501+ posts: 0.15 or 0.3 BTC / 30 days (activity must be more than 300) Min Posts 50/month

The only other one I saw was a per month system and possibly running two separate systems one on posts and one at a flat rate.
Two different form options one that says join on per post the other saying join per flat rate and users decide on a month to month basis.

Member = 60 Activity = 60 posts per week * 4 = 240/month * 2 =  Max 480 posts a month Min 50 = 16 Posts a Day = 0.0004/post
Maximum = 0.192/Month --> 0.2
Full Member 120 Activity = 120 posts per week * 4 = 480/month *1.5  = Max 720 Posts a Month Min 50 = 24 Posts a Day = 0.0006/post
Maximum =  0.4372/Month ---> 0.45
Sr Member 240 Activity = 240 posts per week * 4 = 960/month *1 = Max 960 Posts a Month Min 50 = 32 Posts a Day = 0.0010/post
Maximum = 0.96/Month --> 1  
Hero Member 480 Activity = 480 Posts per week * 4 = 1920/month * 0.6 = Max 1440 Posts a Month Min 50 posts a Day = 48 Posts a Day = 0.0012/post
Maximum = 1.72/Month --> 1.75

That would put the maximum at around 1.72 a month from signature campaigns anyways just a few charts someone might have a better idea.
Could use some rounding I guess to look better.

A combination of the three systems would be the most interesting one
Combining existing posts, member activity and rates, since people would need to buy an account that contributed or has a fair amount of posts to match its rank to take advantage of higher rates and the ones that meet all three qualifications would be far lower in number  

2500+ Post Hero Accounts only go to page 8 or in other words only 235 around less actually since some are less than Hero rank including myself
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=mlist;sort=posts;start=210

Newbie and Jr accounts are achieved far too easily. It'll be harder to defend against multiple sockpuppet accounts created by a single user to bypass the post limits.

[ObscureBean]

HI,
The campaign should be limited to only sr and hero members!
This is the only way to stop  spamming and non constructive posts!
If this campaign is limited to only 100 posts per week and also not weekly paid may be I will jump to another one.
BR
Gondel

Unfortunately, limiting the campaign to sr and hero members in no way guarantees the eradication of spam posts.
You have to remember that the spamming newbie will probably still be spammer even after he reaches hero status.

[Lauda]

I personally dont see a problem with the 100 posts limit, idk. I dont think I will ever go higher and even if, it wont be by much. I am with PrimeDice since I could join. 5 month? 6 month? I dont even remember. I looked it up december 18th was my first payment.

IMHO you should cut members. I understand you want people who post solid and contribute to the board.
You also dont want spammers, so my first cause of action would be to ban those from the campaign that have been banned for spamming. Permanently. Im pretty confident that the mods would help you out with a monthly updated list.

Final suggestion: take all the suggestions you get here and think about what you want for a few days. The lastest changes have been a bit bumpy. Id rather have a clear change.

The spam has been a major issue for a while, anyone have some sort of suggestion on what they feel fair pricing is per rank?

This is where you should start from. I think that the limit is a bit too low, maybe 150 per week or 600 a month would be okay.

[Justin00]

This is the only paying (with the exception of one, which may or may not pay so far) campaign, so take it or leave it boys and girls

[ObscureBean]

I firmly believe it is impossible to make more than 100 really solid posts in a week. 9/10 people who are breaking that limit are just posting worthless contributions as rapidly as they possibly can.

Preferably I'd like to just pay people a fair price based on their rank which would cut down on forum spam tremendously this could upset a lot of participants though. If anyone has some suggestions on how pricing should work for that scheme I'm all ears.

I think this is probably the best attempt to try and limit spam posts.
It's not perfect but then it is not possible to find a perfect solution to this problem.
For a perfect solution to be found, one would have to define 'spam posts' and 'constructive posts' accurately same as you would define constants in an equation in physics.

Limiting posts to 100 per week does not solve the problem but can still be beneficial in a number of ways.

1) The obvious one, less spam posts. Someone can of course create and maintain multiple accounts to bypass this limit but it would definitely be a tedious affair. Making the lives of spammers harder is actually the best we can do at this point

2) Knowing that they are limited in the amount they can get per week, spammers may actually spam less by posting replies in threads/topics that they actually care about.

3) I can't imagine how tedious it must be for the people who have to manually check 1000s of posts for spam. This will reduce their workload