Seems like Stunna have decided already, if you see the OP he have stated that only 100 posts per week will be counted, good bye spammers
it seems a bit too low imho, what if someone has the time to post constructive posts all day? not really fair but whatever...
As a hero member, one could do a full-time job with this. Not anymore...
This isn't supposed to be your job, the purpose of a signature campaign is you add a signature and pretend it doesn't exist and continue posting as you would normally. When the rewards are this high people are posting purely for the benefits though which is spamming up the forum. I am considering changing the way payments work and paying per rank instead of per post.
Paying members for their signature absolutely will cause people to post in a way that they would not post if they were not being paid per post. As per the terms of most signature campaigns users are not allowed to "+1", "bump" or post off topic replies to threads, and as a result you see very little of that throughout the forum.
Instead of having the above "spam" users are instead having meaningful conversations regarding the topic of the various thread in this forum. With a high posting limit, users have in incentive to revisit threads and continue conversations within the thread, instead of posting in a thread and leaving. When PD users continue conversations, the users they are having conversations with will return to the thread (viewing the signature multiple times) and continue the conversation on their end. Even if two people are having a conversation, many more will receive notification of new posts to a thread, and will view the thread multiple times (along with the signatures of users). In other words, having a higher post limit will, in effect cause more view of PD signatures on a per post basis.
Having people post on these forums as "their job" will cause them to create higher quality posts. I am a firm believer that people generally take pride in their work. If a person does not know a lot about Bitcoin now, then they will likely ask questions on threads, receive answers and later be able to post better replies to threads. If a person who posts on these forums as "their job" does not learn how to make "good" posts then any time he or she will revisit a post, they will eventually see criticism about them by others, and will almost certainly see it repeatedly. Since pretty much no one likes to be criticized, they will make corrections to their actions.
From what I can see from this thread, it looks like the max earnings per month used to be 2.4 BTC per month. That works out to 6,000 posts for a member account and 2,000 posts for a Hero Member account. I would say that 2,000 posts in one month would be on the high side for a user, but would be possible for someone without other major commitments. 6,000 posts in one month would probably result in a good amount of somewhat "useless" posts. This is somewhat compensated by the fact that the rates are somewhat lower then the competition.
UpDown.BT pays ~33% more then PD for Hero Members (it appears they have gone AWOL but they did pay users at one point), and XBTec pays the same (they are full but they do pay). On the lower end of the scale, UpDown.BT pays ~87% more for Members and XBTec pays ~75% more for members. The smallest difference that PD has over the competition is for Senior Members as XBTec "only" pays ~30% more per post. Both UpDown.BT and XBTec have a 100 of ~125 and 100 posts per week. Having a higher posting limit would compensate for the lower rates as users who post more would want to join this campaign (see above for benefits of users who post a lot).
The new system cuts maximum payouts by ~93% for Members and by 80% by Hero Members with full members and Senior members being somewhere in between those two values. I do not have access to the breakdown of who is what rank and who made how many posts. If you were to assume that everyone in the campaign was a Member then ~31% would be receiving a pay cut as a result of the new system. If you were to assume that everyone is a Hero Member then ~7.5% would be receiving a pay cut. The likely actual number of users receiving a pay cut is probably closer to 31% then it is 7.5% as there are more members then Hero Members. These users represent your heaviest posters, they also represent the users that generate the most traffic to PD (and thus the most revenue). Cutting these member's pay would cause them to either leave the campaign, or post less (and thus generating less revenue to PD via less traffic).
I would say that the best way to optimize your advertising bitcoin some combination you should do some combination of raising rates and lowering the maximum amount of posts each member can be paid for on the lower end of member rankings. My suggested rates would be .00144 for Hero members, .0015 for Senior members, .00072 for Full Members and .00046 for Members with all rates being per post. This would represent a 20% increase for Hero and Full Members, a 5% increase for Senior members, and a 15% increase for Members. This would bring advertising rates closer to being in line with the competition. If you were to reduce the maximum number of posts a member could get paid to make to 1,500 per month then users would be encouraged to post enough to get the maximum benefit per post (see benefits of a lot of posts above) while not making it so high that users would be encouraged to game the system. It should be noted that competition for bitcoin gambling sites is fierce and a user does not need to look far to find a gambling site. It should also be noted that gambling sites also make their profit on volume
If you are going to limit how much a user is going to post on a weekly basis then you must pay on a weekly basis. Your rules imply that you will pay a maximum of 400 posts per month if a user were to post 100 posts per week. Over the course of a year, if a user posted 100 posts per week they would make 5,200 posts, however would only be paid for 4,800 posts over that year, this would represent a loss of ~8.3% of a user's revenue. If you wish to limit the number of posts you will pay on a monthly basis then you can pay monthly, if you wish to limit how many posts a user can post per week then you must pay weekly. If you do otherwise then you are essentially "nickel and dimming" the very people who are promoting your site and who can have the biggest impact on your site's reputation.
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.
You are not paying members for really solid posts, you are paying members for
constructive and there is a huge difference between the two. I would say that a really solid post is one that would receive several "+1" and similar responses and would receive a significantly higher number of views when compared to other posts on this forum. A constructive post on the other hand is something that is adding to the conversation. If you wish to only pay for really solid posts then your rates should be raised by at least 500%. I would argue this is not an efficient way to spend your advertising bitcoin.
