Should we limit members in one campaign?

[ram64GB]

We've got the same thought. But aren't bounty companies have their rules about spamming on Social Media? They can anytime reject a certain user. There are disadvantages of limitation as it will cause a members to do a hardwork for the project.

[1714643869]

1714643869

[1714643869]

1714643869

[1714643869]

1714643869

[vnh8888]

As bounty hunter I think that limits are good for us, cause we can get more distribution not this low cost tokens in every bounty.

[sinkfish]

why should? the more the merrier..

[Biscutard]

The market is a battleground for every little space for the promotion of the projects. Everyone wants their own space under the sun so offering something is more efficient than limiting someone or something. You can choose anything you want though. There are so many interesting projects out there with good bonuses where you can participate.

I agree that the more is the merrier and this is one of their marketing strategy, just join in the club and leave those spammers out there. Just leave it on the manager to handle everything besides you are just only participating and it is their project, i mean we are just doing what they want us to do in order to gain something from them.

[jvdp]

Due to the increase in the number of participants in your company, the number of payments decreases, thereby losing interest in participation of the majority of bounty hunters. I think it is necessary to limit the number of participants.

Keep in mind bro. We cannot able to predict that all the ICO has been goes bigger in the market once they got listed on exchanges. For that first we need to find the projects white paper and other information about the team who are behind the investment and development.
If you analyze all this joining the signature campaign on bounties means you are rare case in this forum.
I do not suggest the limitation of the participants. It is completely based on the team strength and investment capacity they have. So do not right to say this at all. I believe this is unwanted discussion.

[maimainguyen05]

As I know new bounty campaigns are doing this thing. They set a limit number of participant in their bountyh campaign and they require Full Member rank and above to be able to join their bounty campaign is also a good way to reduce number of participant. I think this case is really needed to avoid alt account abuse campaign in this forum.

[Dreamchaser21]

Due to the increase in the number of participants in your company, the number of payments decreases, thereby losing interest in participation of the majority of bounty hunters. I think it is necessary to limit the number of participants.

Bounty campaigns has no limitations of participants because they want more people to advertise their product. Participants should be aware of this and if they think the reward is too low then don’t participate. Anyway in btc signature campaign there is a limitation and it makes your reward much higher.

[apoorvlathey]

All the bitcoin campaigns have a limited number of slots available for the participants to apply. But on the other side, the bounty campaigns allot a specific number of tokens and most allow unlimited number of participants so as to increase the exposure of their project. This leads to each participant getting lesser tokens and paid less for their work and also for the managers to manage the campaign. In my opinion it is much better to have fixed slots which is beneficial for participants as well as managers.

[Rustamm]

Some bounty campaigns are limiting thier participants and I don't know what's the reason behind it ,it could be the rewards are limited .

Some ICO campaigns do limit the number of participants in the generosity campaign in their own terms of joining the generosity campaign, but this is done only when a fixed amount is paid in bitcoin or even if in the released tokens, but in terms of dollars per message. That is, in this case, a certain number of released tokens is not allocated, and a fixed amount is paid in bitcoin or in dollars, and the increase in participants in the generosity campaign leads to an increase in payments. In general, since such ICO companies mainly rely on headhunters for a predetermined amount of tokens to be issued, then even the more such participants are, the better. They are not interested in these cases in limiting their quantity.

[Leyss]

I do not think there is any need to limit the number of participants in the generosity campaign in one ICO project. The number of such participants is limited to the ICO campaign in cases of payments in bitcoin and if paid for each message in new tokens, only in terms of fiat. In signature campaigns of such a problem with the number of participants in the campaign of generosity, I do not see. There, in half of the cases, the opposite is not enough. In the campaigns on social networks there, probably, this is really a problem. When I come out of curiosity in the tables for a campaign in social networks, there are always hundreds of participants.

[taufik123]

I do not think there is any need to limit the number of participants in the generosity campaign in one ICO project. The number of such participants is limited to the ICO campaign in cases of payments in bitcoin and if paid for each message in new tokens, only in terms of fiat. In signature campaigns of such a problem with the number of participants in the campaign of generosity, I do not see. There, in half of the cases, the opposite is not enough. In the campaigns on social networks there, probably, this is really a problem. When I come out of curiosity in the tables for a campaign in social networks, there are always hundreds of participants.

it is true, facebook and twitter campaign to be one spam that even participants can reach thousands. the limit I know about social media campaigns is about 2000 participants. but for signature campaigns there are limitations depending on the allocation of bounty provided. the more participants the rewards are received less.

[eann014]

Yes, the ICO owner can limit the member who can join their campaign, it is up to them if their budget is also good in few members, but the best way to have a successful ICO is also to have a good amount of member to introduce their ICO. Maybe it will always depend on the owner and their budget.

[FrancePG]

Dear all,
Sorry for any inconvenience for this topic,
I’ve ever joined some bounty campaigns and get some tokens. Bellow are my thinking:
There are some projects attract so much participants, although that means the project is very interesting but it has limited bonus. Result, bonus that each participant receivers from the campaign very small. A lot of participants in one campaign has made so many spams on social networking….
So a question here: Should we limit members in one campaign?
(maybe depend on the bonus value of that campaign)
What are your thinking?
Please share…

I believe that it is necessary to limit the number of participants in the subscription company. When there are no restrictions in the company includes a large number of people and the proportion of participants becomes very small. Better to were restrictions in the number of participants.

[Elexsis]

Well for me we should not actually limit the members in one campaigns so that the popularity of it will be found out then that`s the time that investor will be interested and trying to invest for bigger opportunities.

[maksimukr1989]

on the part of projects this is correct.look at the distribution of tokens of projects.for marketing large amounts are allocated.my answer-let the projects themselves decide whether or not to adjust.

[Daddyj2]

It would be ideal to limit the bounty participants on a bounty campaign so that bounty hunters can get high rewards and its easy to liquidate for bounty managers and easy to spot the scammers.

[litolapis1]

For me it would be a great idea. It will help minimize participants in every bounties to give satisfactory salary for each members. It will helps those who are scammers who abuse the campaigns in our community. It will be more challenge for all members to look and watch bounties that are newly release and and be the first legit member.

[makladun]

it`s better for the project if it has more participants. The purpose of bounty is marketing and if u look at the participants, then of course it's better to limit the number of participants

[ErlindaBit]

You are right, the more campaign participants the gift sharing will be small. Campaign participants can not restrict it. I think that is the authority of the bounty program manager. So as a participant there is no authority to limit a bounty campaign.

[worle1bm]

This type of conversation has been held many times before also on this forum and some bounty managers have restricted the number of participants in a single campaigns based on the past work as they dont want any scams.This means the less the members greater will be rewards for the selected members.Now most of the people also avoid ICO with greater number of participants as they think it can be scam but its all in the hand of bounty manager.