Should we limit members in one campaign?

[Sungeb_Gali]

I think that's a good opinion. Yes should be limited for campaign in bounty program, why? yes that was at least a gift. My suggestion maybe there is a good manager make a bounty for newbie and jr. Member

[haryatiposton01]

I think bounty campaign participants should be limited, this is necessary because gift sharing will be high enough and reduce spam in social media.

[Sahyadri]

If you go through the services thread, you will see that almost every good campaign manager has a cap on the number of participants. This is done because people want quality more than the quantity. This is the same reason why people pay more to Hero/Legendary compared to Member/Full Member. In the price of 1 hero, you can probably have 5-7 Members working, but if a company does that, it would lose its reputation since those posts won't be up to the mark. That is why it is necessary to limit members in one campaign.
The more the members, the more the stakes would be divided and the lesser you would earn. So it is preferable to have a cap on number of participants.

[Claudyah]

yes I think it should and it is very obligatory, limit some members to campaign and market the product, there are only some of the best people who can enter, avoid spam or poor quality postings, so that our product or signature is used by the selected people which has good post quality is not just spam

[BitindaHouse]

I think companies that do this are allowed to invest in small investors, and on private pre-sales they already collected a large amount because of this they are considered very valuable

[Artem57]

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…

100% sure that all the bounty of the company should limit the number of its participants to ensure that everyone could earn decent money. For example in Facebook and Twitter I would do up to 500 participants, and the forum in the company signature not more than 200 participants per company. Therefore, all participants will be able to get good money for his work in the bounty of the company.

[lienfaye]

I think this is a good suggestion. If too many participants join the incentive will be divided until it is not that significant to contribute anymore. So the team also needs to set a reasonable amount of participants to balance the equation.

Well that's right but having more participants to advertise their project is an advantage for them to expand the popularity and be known to many, thats how it is and we cant change that rules unless the team behind it implement some changes. Its true that we cant earn huge amount of money by joining in bounty campaigns but its better than nothing at all.

[Dasha88fed]

Unlikely, the more people are involved, the more spam on the social networks and that is what they want, their ico will be for many people. The purpose of bounty is to makerting and the more participants they promote success

Yes, it is beneficial for the creators of the project to have a lot of participants in their bounty campaign, but for those who participate in the bounty, a large number of participants is not profitable at all, because the common pool is divided into all and the more participants, the less the reward for the work. Recently, a friend of mine showed that he was credited with tokens for $5 for 6 weeks of work in the facebook bounty campaign and all because there were a lot of participants.

[bluecoinX]

In a campaign, it is usually easier to get involved, and the easier it is to go up, the more people will participate in it. I don't think there is much need to play too much, and the patience is limited.

[zwiggel]

In my opinion, we do not necessarily limit our members to participating in campaigns. Anyone can participate in the important thing is the article of the people, the right topic and guaranteed time according to regulations and the manager scores high, he wins and receives bonuses.

[Katabit]

For developers, it is very important that as many people as possible own a token. If most tokens are owned by several whales, then such a project will be too succumb to speculation and will depend very heavily on these whales. As a bounty hunter, I certainly would like to get paid for work more. But this is already a matter of the project developers' greed and not otherwise.

[ityandsyn]

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…

        Well regarding to the number of participants in a campaign is depending on the rules of managers, weather it needs no limits for the number of heads or it is limited up to particular number, and with regards to the payments and bonuses is it's our decision  if we want to stay or leave the crowd.

[ryzaadit]

In my opinion, we do not necessarily limit our members to participating in campaigns. Anyone can participate in the important thing is the article of the people, the right topic and guaranteed time according to regulations and the manager scores high, he wins and receives bonuses.

Limit member campaign its a good decision for the Bounty Hunter do you want to know the reason ? with limited the participant can make the reward stay high for the participant. So you will receive a good reward for your effort. Without limit, you can be received 10$ for work 2-3 month.

[ItsZeroLimit]

On social networks, the lowest percentage of the campaign bounty is allocated, because of that, bounty hunters get a penny. It is necessary to find out whose advertising activity gives the best result. Social networks, or, for example, in video blogs.

[megaqueen777]

Yes, I think so. Too many participants, more spams and the less rewards we get in every bounty. I guess bounty managers should limit the number of the participants and it should be in the first come, first in basis.

[hovrah]

Yes, I think so. Too many participants, more spams and the less rewards we get in every bounty. I guess bounty managers should limit the number of the participants and it should be in the first come, first in basis.

I also do not understand why they do not make such restrictions. The fact is that the ico company is quite a lot and each produces a Bounty company. Therefore, there are many people where everyone can participate. Therefore, limiting the number of participants will not bring certain harm to the same participant. At least even earnings will be higher.

[Valermos]

Some people start and then stop posting and working in bounty, so it is not a good thing to limit the participants, you can not regulate the qty of people who stop work.

[sandor111]

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.

Live and let live. Why setting limits where they are not necessary. This kind of limits would mean just less freedom for projects who want many participants. It is up to each bounty hunter that he chooses campaign. I always take into account how many participants are already there and how many I expect to join after me. Then I calculate how many tokens I expect to get, for example 1.5% of bounty allocation.

[kingvirtus09]

Yes I hope that thet will limit the participants, but it will depends on the bounty manager or who is handling the campaign. Some bounty project practice this system.

[nguyenkhanhhung14]

Most of the time, every bounty campaign wants to have many members join their bounty to promote as many places as possible. If there are many members involved, the project will be well-known and attracted investment capital for the project. So limiting the number of bounty participants is a thought that is not feasible, because very few ICO projects limit the number of members unless their marketing budget is too small.