Almost automated managing of +60 social bounties at the same time? Tagging?

[TheBeardedBaby]

Have you ever wondered how people do this, well here is your answer.
What I found in the B&H section today is a bit crazy.
A complete guide of how to manage 60+ bounties at the same time. The smart guy made it almost automated.
For me this is kind of cheating the managers by creating a list with generated texts, on the other hand no rules are broken.
So I have a mixed feelings what do you guys think?

Here's the guy:

My hearty greetings to all crypto enthusiasts!

While I am trying to make a source where you could track all new bounty campaigns from the bounty BCT thread, I've decided to share with you my way of bounty.
Today I'm participating in 60+ social campaigns and spend approximately 2 hours per day.

...

1. List of all campaigns including all projects I've joined + all needed links + weekly tasks and everyday tasks for each project;
2. Text generator is the excel file with project names, all hashtags for each project and 200+ texts;
3. Report maker - the parser for your social accounts. Fill in your facebook and twitter accounts and it will find all your tweets/retweets (posts/reposts) during the exact period and form a report with all information you need.

All you need is:
1. All excel files described above: >link removed<
2. Latest versions of Windows Framework and PowerQuery (PowerQuery must be newer than 2.5)
3. A little patience to figure out how it works together

[1714155662]

1714155662

[1714155662]

1714155662

[1714155662]

1714155662

[NeuroticFish]

From what I see day by day on Twitter, I have the feeling this is not the only one doing this. The texts are all pretty similar, many of them very short and badly translated.
And it's normal. The bounty managers don't look for any skills. They just need posters. And.. this is what they get.

So, as you also said, no rules are broken. It's up to bounty managers to act or not. And I somehow have a feeling that most of them will not care.
However, nice find

[realcrypto]

I know you think it is not possible to participate in 60+ campaign at a time. I want to tell you that it is possible to participate in 100+ social media bounty campaign. It's just ability to map out your strategy and follow it. Be ready to dedicate your time.

[coinlocket$]

Some people are even on 200+ bounties, trust me!
Someone post even the number on the report, I think it can be a bot but never paid too much attention.

[LoyceV]

The bounty managers don't look for any skills. They just need posters. And.. this is what they get.

The more they spam, the more exposure the campaign gets, and the more they earn. It's a terrible system with terrible incentives.

I know you think it is not possible to participate in 60+ campaign at a time. I want to tell you that it is possible to participate in 100+ social media bounty campaign. It's just ability to map out your strategy and follow it. Be ready to dedicate your time.

That just means you're unleashing massive amounts of spam on Twitter and Facebook. I can't help but smile how big data gets a taste of what they've created

[funsponge]

I doubt the bounty managers care as they only care about exposure. Probably doesn't warrant tagging as it should be up to the bounty managers to remove people like this if they think it's needed. But they just don't care as long as their name gets out there. I can't really blame people doing this either. 

[Welsh]

The bounty managers aren't going to care if it's automated or manual.

I don't know how much people are earning from these bounties, and I used to think it was peanuts. However, it does seem people are willing to go extraordinary lengths in order to do it.

[Theb]

So what everybody is mostly suggesting is that the Bounty Managers need to be the ones who change? Like instead of focusing on accepting and accepting members they should take a look at their post quality before they get accepted in the campaign? The problem here is anyone can be a bounty manager and also anyone can post a Bounty Campaign thread, aside from removing all kinds bounty campaigns the way I see it is there is no other solution rather than limiting the Bounty Campaign managers who can post a Bounty Campaign thread, in which these bounty campaign managers are the ones who can be trusted that they are not accepting spammers and shitposters.

[funsponge]

So what everybody is mostly suggesting is that the Bounty Managers need to be the ones who change? Like instead of focusing on accepting and accepting members they should take a look at their post quality before they get accepted in the campaign? The problem here is anyone can be a bounty manager and also anyone can post a Bounty Campaign thread, aside from removing all kinds bounty campaigns the way I see it is there is no other solution rather than limiting the Bounty Campaign managers who can post a Bounty Campaign thread, in which these bounty campaign managers are the ones who can be trusted that they are not accepting spammers and shitposters.

I don't like the idea of a centralized picking of the certain people who can run the bounty campaigns but something needs to be done about it even though I disagree with a centralized list of people I think it would be better than the current situation where anyone and their mother can create a bounty.

Maybe DefaultTrust can start tagging the bad bounty managers as they are promoting spam?

[TheBeardedBaby]

Why not then make a new additional rank for example : Bounty Manager, like the Copper Member. So only those ranked ones will be allowed to post in the bounty section.
There should be a procedure to apply for such position, based on different criteria,maybe same as the Merit sources today.
This will reduce the fake and scam projects and the spam too. Of course it makes everything more centralized.
I guess is too much time and work implementing those changes, and it will be easier just to remove the bounty section but, it's all about compromises.

[coinlocket$]

Why not then make a new additional rank for example : Bounty Manager, like the Copper Member. So only those ranked ones will be allowed to post in the bounty section.
There should be a procedure to apply for such position, based on different criteria,maybe same as the Merit sources today.
This will reduce the fake and scam projects and the spam too. Of course it makes everything more centralized.
I guess is too much time and work implementing those changes, and it will be easier just to remove the bounty section but, it's all about compromises.

Now that we have the merit system just limit the section to members+ and copper members is already a great solution to avoid the mass spam abusing on bounties.

THE SCAMMER Guinness world record on bitcointalk 1 man 1000 accounts 150k+ usd!

[criz2fer]

So what everybody is mostly suggesting is that the Bounty Managers need to be the ones who change? Like instead of focusing on accepting and accepting members they should take a look at their post quality before they get accepted in the campaign? The problem here is anyone can be a bounty manager and also anyone can post a Bounty Campaign thread, aside from removing all kinds bounty campaigns the way I see it is there is no other solution rather than limiting the Bounty Campaign managers who can post a Bounty Campaign thread, in which these bounty campaign managers are the ones who can be trusted that they are not accepting spammers and shitposters.

I don't like the idea of a centralized picking of the certain people who can run the bounty campaigns but something needs to be done about it even though I disagree with a centralized list of people I think it would be better than the current situation where anyone and their mother can create a bounty.

Maybe DefaultTrust can start tagging the bad bounty managers as they are promoting spam?

Or warned them on making their threads spammy. There's a way on minimizing it, look at ALU's bounty campaigns. Using google form, they limit spammy thread(but still there are members that don't read rules) that most of the bounty managers are lack off.

Why not then make a new additional rank for example : Bounty Manager, like the Copper Member. So only those ranked ones will be allowed to post in the bounty section.
There should be a procedure to apply for such position, based on different criteria,maybe same as the Merit sources today.
This will reduce the fake and scam projects and the spam too. Of course it makes everything more centralized.
I guess is too much time and work implementing those changes, and it will be easier just to remove the bounty section but, it's all about compromises.

IMHO, there's no need for applying. What if a scammer applies for it? It will be another additional work for the Admins just to check the application. Just leave the current system for now.

[Welsh]

Why not then make a new additional rank for example : Bounty Manager, like the Copper Member. So only those ranked ones will be allowed to post in the bounty section.
There should be a procedure to apply for such position, based on different criteria,maybe same as the Merit sources today.
This will reduce the fake and scam projects and the spam too. Of course it makes everything more centralized.
I guess is too much time and work implementing those changes, and it will be easier just to remove the bounty section but, it's all about compromises.

This doesn't really do anything about them managing the campaign though. All this does is puts a payment barrier for those who want to become a bounty manager. They could still pay the fee, and not moderate it. That's assuming your going to treat it like the Copper Membership.

If you are going to have some sort of criteria like the applicants of merit sources then I'm not sure how this would work either. What sort of data would they have to present to get accepted?

[Theb]

So what everybody is mostly suggesting is that the Bounty Managers need to be the ones who change? Like instead of focusing on accepting and accepting members they should take a look at their post quality before they get accepted in the campaign? The problem here is anyone can be a bounty manager and also anyone can post a Bounty Campaign thread, aside from removing all kinds bounty campaigns the way I see it is there is no other solution rather than limiting the Bounty Campaign managers who can post a Bounty Campaign thread, in which these bounty campaign managers are the ones who can be trusted that they are not accepting spammers and shitposters.

I don't like the idea of a centralized picking of the certain people who can run the bounty campaigns but something needs to be done about it even though I disagree with a centralized list of people I think it would be better than the current situation where anyone and their mother can create a bounty.

Maybe DefaultTrust can start tagging the bad bounty managers as they are promoting spam?

This won't work like I said literally anyone can become a bounty managers, some Bounty Campaigns are even run by Jr. Members with Copper Membership. Tagging them won't sold anything as literally anyone has the potential to post a Bounty Campaign thread and become a bounty campaign manager. If we can't stop this money driven bounty managers spam won't stop in the forum.

[TheBeardedBaby]

Why not then make a new additional rank for example : Bounty Manager, like the Copper Member. So only those ranked ones will be allowed to post in the bounty section.
There should be a procedure to apply for such position, based on different criteria,maybe same as the Merit sources today.
This will reduce the fake and scam projects and the spam too. Of course it makes everything more centralized.
I guess is too much time and work implementing those changes, and it will be easier just to remove the bounty section but, it's all about compromises.

This doesn't really do anything about them managing the campaign though. All this does is puts a payment barrier for those who want to become a bounty manager. They could still pay the fee, and not moderate it. That's assuming your going to treat it like the Copper Membership.

If you are going to have some sort of criteria like the applicants of merit sources then I'm not sure how this would work either. What sort of data would they have to present to get accepted?

Of course, it's just an idea, not a solid solution to the problem. What if it is based on Trust since we are talking of distribution of wealth of some sort, then people has to be trustworthy.
Se an example with the escrows here, you will trust more the person with higher trust rating instead of newbie with no rating at all. You have to build yourself a reputation, why would you risk it later? So same can be implemented for the bounty managers, there can be a bounty score too. Managing good one campaign, your score rises. If you allow spamming your score will decrees.
Based on your rating you can have a higher fee for your work.
I can try to developed this idea more.

[funsponge]

So what everybody is mostly suggesting is that the Bounty Managers need to be the ones who change? Like instead of focusing on accepting and accepting members they should take a look at their post quality before they get accepted in the campaign? The problem here is anyone can be a bounty manager and also anyone can post a Bounty Campaign thread, aside from removing all kinds bounty campaigns the way I see it is there is no other solution rather than limiting the Bounty Campaign managers who can post a Bounty Campaign thread, in which these bounty campaign managers are the ones who can be trusted that they are not accepting spammers and shitposters.

I don't like the idea of a centralized picking of the certain people who can run the bounty campaigns but something needs to be done about it even though I disagree with a centralized list of people I think it would be better than the current situation where anyone and their mother can create a bounty.

Maybe DefaultTrust can start tagging the bad bounty managers as they are promoting spam?

This won't work like I said literally anyone can become a bounty managers, some Bounty Campaigns are even run by Jr. Members with Copper Membership. Tagging them won't sold anything as literally anyone has the potential to post a Bounty Campaign thread and become a bounty campaign manager. If we can't stop this money driven bounty managers spam won't stop in the forum.

That's true maybe we could limit the announcement/bounty threads to higher ranked members then to prevent this issue and then default trust can weed out the bad ones.

I guess theymos wouldn't implement this because of the copper membership but I think this is the only way to do it other than removing bounties/signatures all together.

[Crimzon]

OK, I am this "smart guy" who tried to help people to automate a little their everyday work and all I received is a red trust because of this topic and now I could be disqualified from some of them for trying to be useful for community. Fair enough. I did not break any rules and did not suggest any bots, just wanted to share my way of managing campaigns using Microsoft Office.

[amishmanish]

I know you think it is not possible to participate in 60+ campaign at a time. I want to tell you that it is possible to participate in 100+ social media bounty campaign. It's just ability to map out your strategy and follow it. Be ready to dedicate your time.

That just means you're unleashing massive amounts of spam on Twitter and Facebook. I can't help but smile how big data gets a taste of what they've created

As far as we can reasonably guess and judge from the recent events, Facebook had been using user data to target individual users for a long time. They have been generating a log of their activities and analyzing them to suggest ads, show similar updates and so on. I am sure these are targeted algorithms.
The spam generated by the Facebook and Twitter accounts pertaining to ICOs, will only ever be related to those particular users.

It would be safe to assume that most of these "accounts" consist of bot accounts or farming rings of 10,000- 20,000 people who are all in each others friend list and are all advertising ICOs to each other. The situation is hilarious actually.. My point is , as much as I too would like to smile over ICOs screwing up their Big Data algorithms; i think the problem isn't as severe as you think and those people are smarter than we care to accept..

OK, I am this "smart guy" who tried to help people to automate a little their everyday work and all I received is a red trust because of this topic and now I could be disqualified from some of them for trying to be useful for community. Fair enough. I did not break any rules and did not suggest any bots, just wanted to share my way of managing campaigns using Microsoft Office.

Too bad man. Although I know a way with which you can help the community wayyy more. You have the smarts to subvert the naturally justified methods of promotion which means you must also have the smarts to SPOT some of these people who are doing it. I am sure you can appreciate that this is a big problem for all the "hardworking" bounty hunters trying to make a "living" here. If someone with an army of bots and automated tools eats up 5k airdrop addresses and bounties, just imagine what will be left for all the others here who can barely put together a sentence??!! The SMART ones will take away all their tokens...

"ALL YOUR TOKENS ARE BELONG TO US!!" 
Maybe you could try and help find some of these people.

As far as your present sentencing goes, well, "In cat we trust!"

[cabalism13]

The more they spam, the more exposure the campaign gets, and the more they earn.

I really don't know what reaction should I make, It maybe true in all aspects but still campaigns weren't supposed to be like this I think?

It's a terrible system with terrible incentives.

Then I guess, It was like committing a crime just to satisfy yourself and replenish your own needs. And while it was like that, then waiting for this forum to be absolutely spam-free will be just on our dreams.

OK, I am this "smart guy" who tried to help people to automate a little their everyday work and all I received is a red trust because of this topic

That's how it works with the current system. Different accusations will turn out to be one, then suddenly misjudgement will soon arrived with a MARK of RED.

and now I could be disqualified from some of them for trying to be useful for community. Fair enough. I did not break any rules and did not suggest any bots, just wanted to share my way of managing campaigns using Microsoft Office.

Just be on your positive side mate Nothing will be good if you stressed out yourself like that. Even if you received such unfairly feedbacks don't stop from sharing good infos Just think that you're doing the right thing and they just don't seem to see like the way you do.

[krishnaverma]

I know you think it is not possible to participate in 60+ campaign at a time. I want to tell you that it is possible to participate in 100+ social media bounty campaign. It's just ability to map out your strategy and follow it. Be ready to dedicate your time.

I have a feeling that this is done with the help of staff. Once a person is able to get away with multiple accounts, he will try to expand to as much as possible.

We can only report such cases and hope that some action is taken by staff.