Should we limit members in one campaign?

[nik009]

I think that of course it is worth limiting the number of participants in the bounty. Who first stood up and sneakers

There was one bounty company on a tweet, a man very much, I figured that it would be a maximum of 10 dollars per month approximately, did not even participate

[Zarinagotyu1]

There is no sense in limiting the number of participants, the more people are engaged in advertising, the more people in general will know about the product

[cryptocurrencyguru]

Bounty Campaigns is creative promotion and knowledge sharing there would be restrictions for campaign restriction of the number of members count

[hovrah]

Bounty Campaigns is creative promotion and knowledge sharing there would be restrictions for campaign restriction of the number of members count

some Bounty companies have a limitation on the number of participants. But some manager also sets the conditions for limiting the rankings of bitcointalk accounts.

[Ayston]

Twitter and Facebook or social media should be at least limit their joiners since most of the hunter only join this category and signature is lesser... Hahaha but it's up to the manager also since the team will decide it themselves.

[rextoinsem]

Of course, they should be limited, but it is not profitable for any of the managers, because the more people, the more powerful the marketing company is. And the fact that the participants of the bounty program can't have it nobody cares.

[sigtmerchant]

First of all, no "we" can limit or decide anything in a campaign that doesn't belong to them, their only decision may be whether to participate or not.
Having said that, I do notice too that bounties are becoming smaller to the point when they become ridiculously small and aren't worth any effort.

[Mahanton]

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…

Actually we means the forum members right,we can't do anything in these case because the project needs as much as promotions to become more successful so they never limits the participants whatsoever,if you want high bonus from campaign join on the campaign with less participants or in the signature campaigns where the spots are very limited.

It can be classified since there are campaign which do pay on bitcoin and on altcoin which is on bounty campaign. If the company would decide to pay tokens then limitation isnt possible and as you said they would really need exposure as big as possible for their token or project.This is why we commonly see there are lots of participants into a campaign but this would be totally on projects budget.

[andriiklim]

In my opinion you need to limit amount of members, who will be faster that will get more coins, because if a lot of members then you'll get very little.

[Germantopov1]

On the one hand it sounds good to limit members to rise the bonus for them but on the other hand i think we should not limit them so everyone would have an opportunity to have experience such as this

[baghdatis1990]

         Regarding this topic, I think a limitation of participants to a campaign is an advantage for active and already enrolled participants, because weekly stakes will increase for them so they will be more significant. But to promote the project does not. The more enrolled, the more you will know about that project. Therefore, I think they will not put all the projects in the future, limiting the participants, because it is not for their advantage.

[AlekseyCrypto]

I definitely support your idea to limit the number of participants in the bounty. But managers need to raise funds for the project and they will not do it.

[tenebriscaelum]

Instead of limiting the number of participants in a campaign why not just add more requirements for the participants. The ranking, friends and followers of members sometimes are just not enough. What bounties need is members that can provide quality postings and/or topics. Pre selecting members depending on skill set can be a way to lessen the members that cannot do the job weekly and it will provide a good marketing to the ICO.

[PetrovichCoinMaster]

Founders want to get a better result for a fixed amount of money. Therefore, it is hardly possible to see strict restrictions on the number of participants in social campaigns.

If viewed from the bounty party, the ideal variant is up to 1000 participants in social campaigns and up to 200 in signatures.

[kreket1]

I believe that it is definitely worthwhile to introduce a limit in social campaigns. Soon we will generally work for free. Theme by a little dies.

[Michail.]

Some managers already limit the number of participants, as on the Bountyhive platform, but the payments are still very small ...

[OnnoTunes]

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 don't agree with limiting people. Everyone has equal chance to participate in bounties. It's a marketing event for the projects, so more the people more the advertisement.

[mbah]

When restrictions on the number of participants in the campaign could make a project running smoothly then it doesn't matter. spam is very troubling indeed all people and if these restrictions are imposed is also not a problem. of course, if the participant is limited then the allocation results acceptable to be slightly larger.

[Onestepinhell]

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, many companies now began to limit the number of participants in social networks companies, so everything depends on the company, and in the company's principle, how many of the companies advertise it the more the better. So that from this point of view, there will be no restrictions.

[Cemplakaleght]

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…

Yes I agree with your opinion, should all the gifts be limited to the participants, so we bounty the hunters so eager in the search for the gift.
And also with limited participants, so we can know to calculate our allocations.
Many big projects,
participants a lot but we got a little gift.
Or change the rules such as bounty signature system, the rank is also in use